Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:25 AM - Re: Crack to nose wheel fairing bracket (Don McDonald)
2. 05:26 AM - Re: Fresh Meat: New Door Idea (Ron B.)
3. 07:44 AM - Re: Wing skin question (Rick)
4. 07:50 AM - Re: Crack to nose wheel fairing bracket (John Gonzalez)
5. 07:51 AM - Re: Wing skin question (Billy & Tami Britton)
6. 07:51 AM - bit sizes (JHearnsberger)
7. 08:03 AM - diode vs guarded switch (Chris Hukill)
8. 08:43 AM - Re: bit sizes (John Trollinger)
9. 08:49 AM - Re: bit sizes (JHearnsberger)
10. 08:52 AM - Re: bit sizes (Perry, Phil)
11. 09:04 AM - Re: Wing skin question (Seano)
12. 09:06 AM - Re: bit sizes (Seano)
13. 09:11 AM - Re: bit sizes (johngoodman)
14. 09:41 AM - Re: Re: 10 SB (Tim Olson)
15. 10:32 AM - Re: bit sizes (DLM)
16. 11:24 AM - Re: bit sizes (Don McDonald)
17. 11:51 AM - Re: Re: 10 SB (Scott Schmidt)
18. 01:03 PM - Re: Re: 10 SB (Scott Schmidt)
19. 01:30 PM - Re: Re: 10 SB (Miller John)
20. 01:41 PM - Re: Wing skin question (Kelly McMullen)
21. 01:47 PM - Re: Re: 10 SB (DLM)
22. 02:04 PM - Re: 10 SB (Bob Turner)
23. 02:23 PM - Re: Re: 10 SB (DLM)
24. 02:27 PM - Re: Wing skin question (John Trollinger)
25. 02:42 PM - Re: Wing skin question (DLM)
26. 02:58 PM - Re: bit sizes (Linn Walters)
27. 03:06 PM - Re: Re: 10 SB (Linn Walters)
28. 03:11 PM - Re: bit sizes (Seano)
29. 03:51 PM - Re: bit sizes (Dj Merrill)
30. 04:22 PM - Re: bit sizes (Strasnuts)
31. 04:43 PM - Re: Re: bit sizes (ricksked@cox.net)
32. 05:24 PM - Re: Re: Flap motor rod travel (Chris)
33. 06:28 PM - Re: [Bulk] Re: bit sizes (Linn Walters)
34. 07:18 PM - Re: Wing skin question (davidsoutpost@comcast.net)
35. 07:35 PM - Re: Wing skin question (Rick and Sandra Lark)
36. 08:22 PM - doors & insulation (rvdave)
37. 08:44 PM - Re: doors & insulation (ricksked@cox.net)
38. 09:15 PM - Re: doors & insulation (John Gonzalez)
39. 10:00 PM - Re: doors & insulation (Scott Schmidt)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Crack to nose wheel fairing bracket |
Larger diameter washer would have probably helped spread the load.... did y
ou balance your wheel pants?
Don McDonald
--- On Sat, 1/16/10, Evan & Tania <etandrews@westnet.com.au> wrote:
From: Evan & Tania <etandrews@westnet.com.au>
Subject: RV10-List: Crack to nose wheel fairing bracket
Everyone,
I have found a crack on my front nose wheel fairing bracket.- I suspect t
hat
the crack has developed because the bracket has not been centrally aligned
on the wheel bolt and thus the lower section of the bracket was not
supported as well (please see attached photo).---This may be somethin
g that
you want to check for when next pumping up the nose wheel.
Regards
Evan Andrews
40379 Flying 100hrs
(Brisbane)
E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.1.0.447)
Database version: 6.14140
http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
=0A=0A=0A
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: Fresh Meat: New Door Idea |
I'm not trying to knock your idea. I'm all for a solution, and thanks for taking
the time thinking forward. I'm just thinking of what ifs and then a more informed
solution can be had. I'm probably one of the more forgetful persons around
so a good solution, I'm all for.
Ron
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281885#281885
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: | Wing skin question |
Bill,
Are you talking about feathering the edges on the overlap? If so, I used a
belt sander and finished it up with a vixen file. Sorry don't have the plans
in front to reference the page.
Rick
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Billy & Tami
Britton
Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 3:56 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Wing skin question
Page 16-2 step 5. Wing skin joint detail. I kinda understand what it's
asking me to do but does anybody have any pics of exactly what it wants.
How is the best way to accomplish this job?
Thanks in advance,
Bill
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: | Crack to nose wheel fairing bracket |
When you speak of balancing the wheel faring=2C what do you consider the ba
lance point.
The brackets are tied into the faring in eight places. The Bracket is ancho
red to the wheel fork in four places. Does one use the mean distance betwee
n the two achor points that go into the wheel fork or would one use the mea
n distance between the bracket connections into the fiberglass faring???
Please explain the logic.
Thanks=2C
JOhn G.
From: building_partner@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Crack to nose wheel fairing bracket
Larger diameter washer would have probably helped spread the load.... did y
ou balance your wheel pants?
Don McDonald
--- On Sat=2C 1/16/10=2C Evan & Tania <etandrews@westnet.com.au> wrote:
From: Evan & Tania <etandrews@westnet.com.au>
Subject: RV10-List: Crack to nose wheel fairing bracket
Everyone=2C
I have found a crack on my front nose wheel fairing bracket. I suspect tha
t
the crack has developed because the bracket has not been centrally aligned
on the wheel bolt and thus the lower section of the bracket was not
supported as well (please see attached photo). This may be something that
you want to check for when next pumping up the nose wheel.
Regards
Evan Andrews
40379 Flying 100hrs
(Brisbane)
E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (6.1.0.447)
Database version: 6.14140
http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor-antivirus/
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: Wing skin question |
That's exactly what I''m asking about. Is it a slow process or does the
metal come off pretty quickly. I have a belt sander but I know how fast
you can mess things up with it. It's looking like I'll probably just
use a hand powered sander and see how that goes.
Thanks to all that have replied.
Bill
From: Rick
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 9:42 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Wing skin question
Bill,
Are you talking about feathering the edges on the overlap? If so, I used
a belt sander and finished it up with a vixen file. Sorry don't have the
plans in front to reference the page.
Rick
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Billy & Tami
Britton
Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 3:56 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Wing skin question
Page 16-2 step 5. Wing skin joint detail. I kinda understand what it's
asking me to do but does anybody have any pics of exactly what it wants.
How is the best way to accomplish this job?
Thanks in advance,
Bill
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhttp://forums.matronics.comht
tp://www.matronics.com/contribution
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 |
|
I am getting ready to drill on the rear spar. I am confused about the bit sizes.
I see that #30 is not the same as 1/8". But, they look fairly close.
Can you use #30 for 1/8", #40 for 3/32", and #10 for 3/16"?
Or when the say use 1/8" drill, use 1/8"?
Thanks,
Jake
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281903#281903
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: | diode vs guarded switch |
Bob Nuckolls
I am designing my dual alternator RV10 system, and would like your
opinion. I am providing an alternate feed to the Ebus from a remote
relay at the battery. I want this so I can power the Ebus for extended
periods, to program the FMS before engine start, as well for abnormal
inflight situations. I have planned an avionics bus relay to feed the
avionics bus from the main. (I know your thoughts on this, but I want
the ability to have all that stuff off for engine start). My design will
have a guarded switch or diode to provide a back door to the main bus,
thru the Ebus, and it's bus-tie breaker to the avionics bus. The guarded
switch will give me the most control of this back door, as well as a
backup to the avionics bus relay, but it'll cost me a voltage drop
(shouldn't be an issue). The diode will allow the back flow without any
pilot action, which has it's own merits. The ebus to avionics bus-tie
breaker will be a lower value than the ebus feed breaker, to assure that
if the alternate Ebus feed is over taxed by anything on the avionics, or
main bus, it'll open and I'll still have power to the Ebus.
Would you suggest that I use a diode, or guarded switch for this
function?
Thanks
Chris Hukill
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 |
|
they are not the same.
1/8th = .125
#30 = .1285
use what the plans call for, it does make a difference
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 10:51 AM, JHearnsberger
<jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>wrote:
> jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>
>
> I am getting ready to drill on the rear spar. I am confused about the bit
> sizes. I see that #30 is not the same as 1/8". But, they look fairly close.
>
> Can you use #30 for 1/8", #40 for 3/32", and #10 for 3/16"?
>
> Or when the say use 1/8" drill, use 1/8"?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jake
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281903#281903
>
>
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 |
|
I'm learning. Thank you.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281918#281918
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 |
|
Jake,
The numbered bits are slightly larger than the fractional.
You'll initially drill all of your holes with a fractional bit. 3/32,
1/8, etc.... That process is referred to as "Match Drilling" in Van's
plans. This means you're getting all the parts in the proper position
and drilling an undersized pilot hole to get the parts to align and
"Match".
After you've accomplished "Match Drilling", then you "Final Drill".
This is the process where you use the numbered drill sizes to slightly
enlarge the hole to the proper size.
You'll want to pay close attention to the terms "match" vs "final" when
you're reading the plans.
I believe there's a little more detail in Section 5 on this topic. It's
not bundled inside your larger plans book, but is a smaller book that
came in its own folder with the kit. Mine came with a red cover....
Phil
-----Original Message-----
From: JHearnsberger [mailto:jakehearnsberger@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 9:52 AM
Subject: RV10-List: bit sizes
<jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>
I am getting ready to drill on the rear spar. I am confused about the
bit sizes. I see that #30 is not the same as 1/8". But, they look fairly
close.
Can you use #30 for 1/8", #40 for 3/32", and #10 for 3/16"?
Or when the say use 1/8" drill, use 1/8"?
Thanks,
Jake
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281903#281903
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: Wing skin question |
I set the two pieces close to the end of the table and drew a reference
line and used a 6 inch DA sander. Worked well and didn't take too much
too fast.
----- Original Message -----
From: Billy & Tami Britton
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 8:50 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Wing skin question
That's exactly what I''m asking about. Is it a slow process or does
the metal come off pretty quickly. I have a belt sander but I know how
fast you can mess things up with it. It's looking like I'll probably
just use a hand powered sander and see how that goes.
Thanks to all that have replied.
Bill
From: Rick
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 9:42 AM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Wing skin question
Bill,
Are you talking about feathering the edges on the overlap? If so, I
used a belt sander and finished it up with a vixen file. Sorry don't
have the plans in front to reference the page.
Rick
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Billy & Tami
Britton
Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 3:56 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: RV10-List: Wing skin question
Page 16-2 step 5. Wing skin joint detail. I kinda understand what
it's asking me to do but does anybody have any pics of exactly what it
wants. How is the best way to accomplish this job?
Thanks in advance,
Bill
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhttp://forums.matronics.comht
tp://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
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 |
|
Get a drill size chart so you can see the decimal size. This way you know
what is smaller. A lot of times you need to first drill the hole undersize
with the 3/32 or 1/8 then move to the number drills. Usually the number
drills are the last drill size you will use for rivets, bolts etc.
----- Original Message -----
From: "JHearnsberger" <jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 8:51 AM
Subject: RV10-List: bit sizes
> <jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>
>
> I am getting ready to drill on the rear spar. I am confused about the bit
> sizes. I see that #30 is not the same as 1/8". But, they look fairly
> close.
>
> Can you use #30 for 1/8", #40 for 3/32", and #10 for 3/16"?
>
> Or when the say use 1/8" drill, use 1/8"?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jake
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281903#281903
>
>
>
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 |
|
Jake,
Take a look at any books that might have been included with the tool kit you might
have purchased. They should have a good description of drills, as well as
some kind of table for reference.
I would suggest you look into a box set of #1 thru #60. Here are two sites to start:
http://www.panamericantool.com/products.cfm look for part 16-401
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/topages/drillbitset.php
With shipping, you'll spend between $75-$80 for 60 bits in a stylish box; a good
deal by any standard for drill bits.
John
--------
#40572 QB. Engine on, wing attach coming soon. Panel delivery soon.
N711JG reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281926#281926
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 |
|
I've been following the SB thread since it started, deciding not
to get into it right away. It seems that usually people start
going off on tangents about how crappy the door design is, or
how various door designs would be superior...never mind that
without some major work/time/expense there's no real way any
builder will have an improved door design. The kit "is what it
is", and if you really want the pains of major door redesign,
then hey, I'm all for it, but I believe that when it comes right
down to reality, most of you would rather just finally have a
nice flying RV-10 to fly, for a reasonable price, in a minimal
amount of years of built time. Any departure from the plans
usually adds time and expense, and a door redesign would involve
both, and only lots of testing and time would end up proving
if it were even a successful modification.
Then it comes to handles, latches, locks, and all that stuff.
Sure, there are some nice flush latches. No, Van's didn't
design in door locks. Yeah, you can buy add-on internal
handles. In reality, I don't really view ANY of these things
as significant items. They're almost entirely cosmetic,
and many of those cosmetics may mean something to various
individuals, but others may not care a bit. For me, I'm
perfectly happy with the looks of the internal door handle.
I don't mind the external handle, although I've seen nicer
than mine. And, I don't mind the door not locking. I maintain
that I'd much prefer a door ALARM system to a door LOCK system,
because I just want to scare them away BEFORE they rip
my fiberglass apart on the door, or break the plexi on
my window. But that again is just a personal perspective.
None of these add-ons are really significant.
The exception to these insignificant add-ons is the addition
of the rivethead/iflyrv10.com door pin receivers made out
of aluminum. I really wish that during my build, I would
have had the opportunity to have these, and know all the things
we know today. I think a new builder is crazy not to build
those out of aluminum. I'm not necessarily convinced that
for someone like me, with completed doors, it's an easy
upgrade to try to cut my pin ends and thread in the magnetic
ones, so I haven't gone that route. I'm also not a huge
fan of permanent or electro magnets in the doors, as I know
that I've heard enough about how sensitive good magnetometers
are to know that I'd rather avoid magnets if possible. My
doors have glassed over screws on the outside, and I just
haven't wanted to tackle any pin modifications right now.
I really HAVE been meaning to order the aluminum guides
though. I'd love to have those, and I've lost enough to
chipped paint and fiberglass from that rear pin. My
original idea was an embedded stainless striker plate to
protect the paint, and some day I'd love to be motivated
enough to fix that.
From a functional standpoint I think the doors are fine.
They work, and I've flown now over 585 hours with them and
am not disappointed at all, other than the rear pins that
have chipped my paint. From a safety standpoint, I know
my pins go THROUGH the metal door frame, and I know that
when I latch the door all the way, it's a definite lock,
and I can't rotate my lever at all. So once I button my
family into the plane and inspect the door gaps, I know
that we're not going to lose the door.
My plane was doing it's first flight just before Van's
came out with the door warning lights. I still have the
bag of hardware on the bench, awaiting my installation.
I've read Scott's comments about how EVERYONE should
have warning lights. I can't disagree. I think warning
lights are a great idea. I also like Vic's idea of
adding a throttle position sensor to them so that they
don't light up when you're at low power for ground taxi...
because you don't want to become complacent. Personally
though, I feel that my extra-diligent operation of the
doors is REINFORCED by my lack of lights. I know a lot
about a lot of incidents that happen. People tend to
tell me when they hear things. I hadn't heard about the
recent one a couple weeks ago though. Anyway, there have
been enough departed doors that I share the concern deeply
that other builders have. But, I feel that the concern
is not for the doors....it's for the PILOTS. If you build
a door per original plans, and inspect it properly before
flight, and have pins that extend properly, you will NOT
lose a door. If I had lights, and started to look for
the lights every time in lieu of a door gap inspection,
I would become complacent and reliant on that circuitry.
Yes, you can make those light systems pretty bulletproof,
and perfectly aligned and activated...but you can't take
a sloppy pilot checklist who's rushing through his preflight
while trying to race against...well, any of the pressures
that push us, and force him to look at the lights. That
is NOT to say the lights aren't a good idea. But they
are NOT an acceptable substitute for a good door gap
inspection either. We know what happens to these doors if
they're not latched, so nothing short of a perfect
inspection is acceptable. If you give a perfect inspection,
then any and all hardware additions really, truly,
aren't necessary. They're all band-aids against poor
pilot awareness. But, for the record, I do think
the lights are a good idea. I actually have a to-do item
on my calendar that I look at weekly, to order a door
alarm system and once I find the right system, I plan
to install it with the door pin sensors and lights to
provide a loud horn alarm that I can engage with a key
FOB, as a theft deterrent, with the side benefit of having
door latch indicator lights.
Now on to the new SB. I agree, it shouldn't be mandatory.
It would have been nice to have them engage the RV-10
ownership for an acceptable fix, but they didn't. I agree
that the latch is ugly, especially from the outside.
I'm pretty confident that I won't be putting it in, at least
as-delivered. I don't want that rectangular tab outside
and the open slot for water entry any more than many people
do. I don't think it's a bad idea though, either. I think
it's not truly a NECESSARY addition, but it is a safety
device, and therefore it may prevent some operational issues
that are pilot induced, so I actually support those who feel
that it's necessary. I say GO FOR IT. If you like that
"feel good" addition to the door latching, great. I agree
that it should NOT be a mandatory SB...especially since
there are alternate methods to accomplish the same thing that
may actually look/work better and be far more visually
acceptable at the same time. Regardless, I don't think
I plan to install that particular design as delivered. I
would be more inclined to perhaps leave the slot on the
door, but NOT put the tab on the outside. Think about this
for a second, for all you people who want door locks....
Envision the same mechanism, but with just the slot.
through the slot you stick a long allen-key type key
rod. Inside the latch is a hole that this key fits
in. So, when you come up to the plane and want to
open the door, you insert the key and tip the latch.
What is the downside? Well, if you're unconscious
in the plane after a crash, rescuers can't open that
latch. But, if they can open the door handle, do you
REALLY think that one single latch is going to prevent
them from getting to you, considering how weak the
door attachment is anyway? I highly doubt it. A screwdriver
jammed in the door gap so they could open it enough to
rip the door off is about all it would take. Yeah, maybe
not perfect. You don't like the idea? I don't blame
you....I'd rather have no center latch at all.
Or how about this....you make the latch not just spring
loaded, but lock-openable from the inside. So now you
can have the "key" function as described above, but as
part of an emergency checklist you take the opportunity
to disengage that lock. Why worry about disengaging it...
the door pins will hold the door anyway. So you disengage
the lock, then do your emergency landing.
Or, take it another step further....leave an external
operating latch mechanism, but change it to a button of
some sort that has added mechanics to operate the latch.
I would be much more likely to leave a button on the outside
of my door than that square tab.
Still, none of those ideas really turn me on. I still
think that a properly latched door that is diligently
inspected, is not a worry. My final idea is one that
I've been bouncing around in my own head. I picture
attacking it from the other side...the bottom. How about
a door latch pin, L-shaped rod, that is built in to the
sidewall of the airframe by your seat. This pin can be
manually lifted, inserting the pin through the bottom
of the door. To reinforce the door, you drill a hole and
make a fiberglass hard point in the door at that spot.
So you lift the pin, it goes into the door bottom, and
then you fold the "L" tab of the pin to the side so it
isn't sticking out at you....maybe even add a machined
block into that sidewall that has 2 L-shaped recesses,
where it can recess slightly in the locked and unlocked
position. Again, this latch is only activated from inside
the cockpit, preventing rescuers from unlocking that
lock....but again, I'm SURE you could kick that door out
if that were the only pin, and I'm SURE that they could
rip it off from the outside if they needed to....and
that's in the much smaller chance that you have an
actual survivable crash....the chances are higher that
you'll be a sloppy pilot and lose the door. But, during
any portion of flight where you worry about off-airport
landings... (for instance, as I'm flying over water,
enroute to the Bahamas), you just pull that pin to the
un-latched position. You don't NEED that latch to be
secured, if the rest of the door is secured. In fact,
if you just TESTED that latch before flight, it would
PROVE your pins are secured on the door sides, and you
probably don't even need to leave the door center latch
in place. But, if you can JUST remember that this latch
is something you need to open before an emergency landing,
then it would be a fine method of compliance, and I
bet you could hide it visually better than most other
method.
I've also liked Seano's mechanical methods of adding a
3rd pin, operated by the latch. For people just starting
the build, I would actually think that if this issue
is one you're passionate about, then THAT is probably your
BEST way to deal with it. I'd LOVE to have that option
be one that an already built-and-painted door could have
added, but I doubt that's possible. I'm not obviously
passionate enough about it to rip open my door and build
such a thing, but for a new builder, hey, get him to
give you the drawings and spend some time on it...you
can avoid this ugly-a$$ latch that the SB calls for if you
do.
So the door stuff is an argument I really don't care to dive
in too deeply to. I think it all comes down to the pilot.
I think there are many good ways to prevent the problem
even with a stupid pilot. But to date, I'm not finding
any good ways to really fix the issue mechanically, in an
ideal way, on an already painted RV-10....so, I maintain
my added diligence. I have no big worries. I have 585
happy hours with the design as it is now. Can it be done
better? Sure. If I were building my doors today, would
I do it better? SURE! Is the difference in comfort level
worth me tearing it all apart now? Nope. I just want
to end up with those aluminum guides, and an alarm
system some day, and I'll be plenty satisfied. If I
add a 3rd pin now, it'll probably be through the bottom,
as I described.
Oh, and don't worry too much about me selling my plane
and having to implement the SB per plans...I don't plan
on selling. :)
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
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 |
|
Should use the bit called; also buy the 6" bits so that the drill angle will
be more apparent. IIRC 30 slightly larger than 1/8". Size 4 rivet will be
tight.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of JHearnsberger
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 8:52 AM
Subject: RV10-List: bit sizes
--> <jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>
I am getting ready to drill on the rear spar. I am confused about the bit
sizes. I see that #30 is not the same as 1/8". But, they look fairly close.
Can you use #30 for 1/8", #40 for 3/32", and #10 for 3/16"?
Or when the say use 1/8" drill, use 1/8"?
Thanks,
Jake
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281903#281903
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 |
|
Jake, as usual, you've been given some great information.... but, as a once
upon a time machinist, one of the the first things I would recommend for a
ll builders,-is the purchase of a pair of digital or dial calipers.- Th
ey will not only save you tons of time during the build, you should/could c
k each drill for it's size prior to each use.- You will never use the wro
ng drill if you ck it with the calipers first.- Most of us old guys can't
read the damn number/fractions on the drills anyway.- The whole match dr
ill final drill process is to first insure alignment, and then if not final
drilled, a 3/32 rivet will not go into a 3/32 hole... ok, if it does, it w
on't go willingly.... and if we're going to set 10,000 plus of the dang thi
ngs, then we want them to go willingly.
Jake, where are you located?- If close enough, I'd fly over and give you
a quick lesson and the many uses of the calipers.- (Pascal, does this rin
g any bells)- A good example is making bushings/spacers, most people woul
d lay a scale/tape measure of sorts onto the tubing and scribe a line.... w
ith the calipers you just set the desired dimension, lock the caliper, and
use the calipers as your scribe.- Same measurement, every time.
Don McDonald-
--- On Sun, 1/17/10, Perry, Phil <Phil.Perry@netapp.com> wrote:
From: Perry, Phil <Phil.Perry@netapp.com>
Subject: RE: RV10-List: bit sizes
Jake,
The numbered bits are slightly larger than the fractional.
You'll initially drill all of your holes with a fractional bit.- 3/32,
1/8, etc....- That process is referred to as "Match Drilling" in Van's
plans.- This means you're getting all the parts in the proper position
and drilling an undersized pilot hole to get the parts to align and
"Match".
After you've accomplished "Match Drilling", then you "Final Drill".
This is the process where you use the numbered drill sizes to slightly
enlarge the hole to the proper size.
You'll want to pay close attention to the terms "match" vs "final" when
you're reading the plans.
I believe there's a little more detail in Section 5 on this topic.- It's
not bundled inside your larger plans book, but is a smaller book that
came in its own folder with the kit.- Mine came with a red cover....
Phil
-----Original Message-----
From: JHearnsberger [mailto:jakehearnsberger@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 9:52 AM
Subject: RV10-List: bit sizes
<jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>
I am getting ready to drill on the rear spar. I am confused about the
bit sizes. I see that #30 is not the same as 1/8". But, they look fairly
close.
Can you use #30 for 1/8", #40 for 3/32", and #10 for 3/16"?
Or when the say use 1/8" drill, use 1/8"?
Thanks,
Jake
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281903#281903
le, List Admin.
=0A=0A=0A
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 |
|
Tim, I have been thinking the exact same thing about a latch in the center that
can only be engaged from inside the cockpit.
It would still require a high level of checklist discipline. I agree with you
on the lock, if they want in, they will get in.
I find that a cover is plenty good (out of sight out of mind) and if I ever go
to Mexico or the Baja my plan is to just take off the outside door handles.
I am getting the sense that this SB is a CYA for Van's more than anything from
some of the comments here, VAF and personal e-mails.
Again, that is disappointing to me. From a great solution standpoint on a scale
from 1-10 I give this solution a 1 or 2.
Oh well, I think a 10 can be achieved for the same cost as the proposed.
All I would hope for is the verbiage on the SB to change from:
Required Action: Install Door Safety Latch to Required Action: Optional Door
Safety Latch
Time of Compliance: Before Further Flight to Time of Compliance: Optional
I do believe some great ideas and great solutions will and are coming out of this
so this probably I won't take up any more of my time and I will start coming
up with some ideas that we all can share. There are a ton of super smart and
talented people on this list.
I just can't wait to see what comes out of Goeff's camp. I am expecting a voice
activited with a thumb print sensor. And from Tim I am looking for an iPhone
app that both opens and closes the doors and has a built in "Door Ajar" alarm
that is displayed on the iPhone screen.
Scott Schmidt
scottmschmidt@yahoo.com
N104XP
675 Safe Hours
________________________________
From: Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com>
Sent: Sun, January 17, 2010 10:39:47 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: 10 SB
I've been following the SB thread since it started, deciding not
to get into it right away. It seems that usually people start
going off on tangents about how crappy the door design is, or
how various door designs would be superior...never mind that
without some major work/time/expense there's no real way any
builder will have an improved door design. The kit "is what it
is", and if you really want the pains of major door redesign,
then hey, I'm all for it, but I believe that when it comes right
down to reality, most of you would rather just finally have a
nice flying RV-10 to fly, for a reasonable price, in a minimal
amount of years of built time. Any departure from the plans
usually adds time and expense, and a door redesign would involve
both, and only lots of testing and time would end up proving
if it were even a successful modification.
Then it comes to handles, latches, locks, and all that stuff.
Sure, there are some nice flush latches. No, Van's didn't
design in door locks. Yeah, you can buy add-on internal
handles. In reality, I don't really view ANY of these things
as significant items. They're almost entirely cosmetic,
and many of those cosmetics may mean something to various
individuals, but others may not care a bit. For me, I'm
perfectly happy with the looks of the internal door handle.
I don't mind the external handle, although I've seen nicer
than mine. And, I don't mind the door not locking. I maintain
that I'd much prefer a door ALARM system to a door LOCK system,
because I just want to scare them away BEFORE they rip
my fiberglass apart on the door, or break the plexi on
my window. But that again is just a personal perspective.
None of these add-ons are really significant.
The exception to these insignificant add-ons is the addition
of the rivethead/iflyrv10.com door pin receivers made out
of aluminum. I really wish that during my build, I would
have had the opportunity to have these, and know all the things
we know today. I think a new builder is crazy not to build
those out of aluminum. I'm not necessarily convinced that
for someone like me, with completed doors, it's an easy
upgrade to try to cut my pin ends and thread in the magnetic
ones, so I haven't gone that route. I'm also not a huge
fan of permanent or electro magnets in the doors, as I know
that I've heard enough about how sensitive good magnetometers
are to know that I'd rather avoid magnets if possible. My
doors have glassed over screws on the outside, and I just
haven't wanted to tackle any pin modifications right now.
I really HAVE been meaning to order the aluminum guides
though. I'd love to have those, and I've lost enough to
chipped paint and fiberglass from that rear pin. My
original idea was an embedded stainless striker plate to
protect the paint, and some day I'd love to be motivated
enough to fix that.
>From a functional standpoint I think the doors are fine.
They work, and I've flown now over 585 hours with them and
am not disappointed at all, other than the rear pins that
have chipped my paint. From a safety standpoint, I know
my pins go THROUGH the metal door frame, and I know that
when I latch the door all the way, it's a definite lock,
and I can't rotate my lever at all. So once I button my
family into the plane and inspect the door gaps, I know
that we're not going to lose the door.
My plane was doing it's first flight just before Van's
came out with the door warning lights. I still have the
bag of hardware on the bench, awaiting my installation.
I've read Scott's comments about how EVERYONE should
have warning lights. I can't disagree. I think warning
lights are a great idea. I also like Vic's idea of
adding a throttle position sensor to them so that they
don't light up when you're at low power for ground taxi...
because you don't want to become complacent. Personally
though, I feel that my extra-diligent operation of the
doors is REINFORCED by my lack of lights. I know a lot
about a lot of incidents that happen. People tend to
tell me when they hear things. I hadn't heard about the
recent one a couple weeks ago though. Anyway, there have
been enough departed doors that I share the concern deeply
that other builders have. But, I feel that the concern
is not for the doors....it's for the PILOTS. If you build
a door per original plans, and inspect it properly before
flight, and have pins that extend properly, you will NOT
lose a door. If I had lights, and started to look for
the lights every time in lieu of a door gap inspection,
I would become complacent and reliant on that circuitry.
Yes, you can make those light systems pretty bulletproof,
and perfectly aligned and activated...but you can't take
a sloppy pilot checklist who's rushing through his preflight
while trying to race against...well, any of the pressures
that push us, and force him to look at the lights. That
is NOT to say the lights aren't a good idea. But they
are NOT an acceptable substitute for a good door gap
inspection either. We know what happens to these doors if
they're not latched, so nothing short of a perfect
inspection is acceptable. If you give a perfect inspection,
then any and all hardware additions really, truly,
aren't necessary. They're all band-aids against poor
pilot awareness. But, for the record, I do think
the lights are a good idea. I actually have a to-do item
on my calendar that I look at weekly, to order a door
alarm system and once I find the right system, I plan
to install it with the door pin sensors and lights to
provide a loud horn alarm that I can engage with a key
FOB, as a theft deterrent, with the side benefit of having
door latch indicator lights.
Now on to the new SB. I agree, it shouldn't be mandatory.
It would have been nice to have them engage the RV-10
ownership for an acceptable fix, but they didn't. I agree
that the latch is ugly, especially from the outside.
I'm pretty confident that I won't be putting it in, at least
as-delivered. I don't want that rectangular tab outside
and the open slot for water entry any more than many people
do. I don't think it's a bad idea though, either. I think
it's not truly a NECESSARY addition, but it is a safety
device, and therefore it may prevent some operational issues
that are pilot induced, so I actually support those who feel
that it's necessary. I say GO FOR IT. If you like that
"feel good" addition to the door latching, great. I agree
that it should NOT be a mandatory SB...especially since
there are alternate methods to accomplish the same thing that
may actually look/work better and be far more visually
acceptable at the same time. Regardless, I don't think
I plan to install that particular design as delivered. I
would be more inclined to perhaps leave the slot on the
door, but NOT put the tab on the outside. Think about this
for a second, for all you people who want door locks....
Envision the same mechanism, but with just the slot.
through the slot you stick a long allen-key type key
rod. Inside the latch is a hole that this key fits
in. So, when you come up to the plane and want to
open the door, you insert the key and tip the latch.
What is the downside? Well, if you're unconscious
in the plane after a crash, rescuers can't open that
latch. But, if they can open the door handle, do you
REALLY think that one single latch is going to prevent
them from getting to you, considering how weak the
door attachment is anyway? I highly doubt it. A screwdriver
jammed in the door gap so they could open it enough to
rip the door off is about all it would take. Yeah, maybe
not perfect. You don't like the idea? I don't blame
you....I'd rather have no center latch at all.
Or how about this....you make the latch not just spring
loaded, but lock-openable from the inside. So now you
can have the "key" function as described above, but as
part of an emergency checklist you take the opportunity
to disengage that lock. Why worry about disengaging it...
the door pins will hold the door anyway. So you disengage
the lock, then do your emergency landing.
Or, take it another step further....leave an external
operating latch mechanism, but change it to a button of
some sort that has added mechanics to operate the latch.
I would be much more likely to leave a button on the outside
of my door than that square tab.
Still, none of those ideas really turn me on. I still
think that a properly latched door that is diligently
inspected, is not a worry. My final idea is one that
I've been bouncing around in my own head. I picture
attacking it from the other side...the bottom. How about
a door latch pin, L-shaped rod, that is built in to the
sidewall of the airframe by your seat. This pin can be
manually lifted, inserting the pin through the bottom
of the door. To reinforce the door, you drill a hole and
make a fiberglass hard point in the door at that spot.
So you lift the pin, it goes into the door bottom, and
then you fold the "L" tab of the pin to the side so it
isn't sticking out at you....maybe even add a machined
block into that sidewall that has 2 L-shaped recesses,
where it can recess slightly in the locked and unlocked
position. Again, this latch is only activated from inside
the cockpit, preventing rescuers from unlocking that
lock....but again, I'm SURE you could kick that door out
if that were the only pin, and I'm SURE that they could
rip it off from the outside if they needed to....and
that's in the much smaller chance that you have an
actual survivable crash....the chances are higher that
you'll be a sloppy pilot and lose the door. But, during
any portion of flight where you worry about off-airport
landings... (for instance, as I'm flying over water,
enroute to the Bahamas), you just pull that pin to the
un-latched position. You don't NEED that latch to be
secured, if the rest of the door is secured. In fact,
if you just TESTED that latch before flight, it would
PROVE your pins are secured on the door sides, and you
probably don't even need to leave the door center latch
in place. But, if you can JUST remember that this latch
is something you need to open before an emergency landing,
then it would be a fine method of compliance, and I
bet you could hide it visually better than most other
method.
I've also liked Seano's mechanical methods of adding a
3rd pin, operated by the latch. For people just starting
the build, I would actually think that if this issue
is one you're passionate about, then THAT is probably your
BEST way to deal with it. I'd LOVE to have that option
be one that an already built-and-painted door could have
added, but I doubt that's possible. I'm not obviously
passionate enough about it to rip open my door and build
such a thing, but for a new builder, hey, get him to
give you the drawings and spend some time on it...you
can avoid this ugly-a$$ latch that the SB calls for if you
do.
So the door stuff is an argument I really don't care to dive
in too deeply to. I think it all comes down to the pilot.
I think there are many good ways to prevent the problem
even with a stupid pilot. But to date, I'm not finding
any good ways to really fix the issue mechanically, in an
ideal way, on an already painted RV-10....so, I maintain
my added diligence. I have no big worries. I have 585
happy hours with the design as it is now. Can it be done
better? Sure. If I were building my doors today, would
I do it better? SURE! Is the difference in comfort level
worth me tearing it all apart now? Nope. I just want
to end up with those aluminum guides, and an alarm
system some day, and I'll be plenty satisfied. If I
add a 3rd pin now, it'll probably be through the bottom,
as I described.
Oh, and don't worry too much about me selling my plane
and having to implement the SB per plans...I don't plan
on selling. :)
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
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 |
|
I just realized that Van's has a "Letters and Notices" section which is where the
RV-10 door indicator lights are.
This is where this center latch belongs. That would move it completely out of the
SB section.
http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/notices.htm
Scott Schmidt
scottmschmidt@yahoo.com
________________________________
From: Scott Schmidt <scottmschmidt@yahoo.com>
Sent: Sun, January 17, 2010 12:49:41 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: 10 SB
Tim, I have been thinking the exact same thing about a latch in the center that
can only be engaged from inside the cockpit.
It would still require a high level of checklist discipline. I agree with you
on the lock, if they want in, they will get in.
I find that a cover is plenty good (out of sight out of mind) and if I ever go
to Mexico or the Baja my plan is to just take off the outside door handles.
I am getting the sense that this SB is a CYA for Van's more than anything from
some of the comments here, VAF and personal e-mails.
Again, that is disappointing to me. From a great solution standpoint on a scale
from 1-10 I give this solution a 1 or 2.
Oh well, I think a 10 can be achieved for the same cost as the proposed.
All I would hope for is the verbiage on the SB to change from:
Required Action: Install Door Safety Latch to Required Action: Optional Door
Safety Latch
Time of Compliance: Before Further Flight to Time of Compliance: Optional
I do believe some great ideas and great solutions will and are coming out of this
so this probably I won't take up any more of my time and I will start coming
up with some ideas that we all can share. There are a ton of super smart and
talented people on this list.
I just can't wait to see what comes out of Goeff's camp. I am expecting a voice
activited with a thumb print sensor. And from Tim I am looking for an iPhone
app that both opens and closes the doors and has a built in "Door Ajar" alarm
that is displayed on the iPhone screen.
Scott Schmidt
scottmschmidt@yahoo.com
N104XP
675 Safe Hours
________________________________
From: Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com>
Sent: Sun, January 17, 2010 10:39:47 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: 10 SB
I've been following the SB thread since it started, deciding not
to get into it right away. It seems that usually people start
going off on tangents about how crappy the door design is, or
how various door designs would be superior...never mind that
without some major work/time/expense there's no real way any
builder will have an improved door design. The kit "is what it
is", and if you really want the pains of major door redesign,
then hey, I'm all for it, but I believe that when it comes right
down to reality, most of you would rather just finally have a
nice flying RV-10 to fly, for a reasonable price, in a minimal
amount of years of built time. Any departure from the plans
usually adds time and expense, and a door redesign would involve
both, and only lots of testing and time would end up proving
if it were even a successful modification.
Then it comes to handles, latches, locks, and all that stuff.
Sure, there are some nice flush latches. No, Van's didn't
design in door locks. Yeah, you can buy add-on internal
handles. In reality, I don't really view ANY of these things
as significant items. They're almost entirely cosmetic,
and many of those cosmetics may mean something to various
individuals, but others may not care a bit. For me, I'm
perfectly happy with the looks of the internal door handle.
I don't mind the external handle, although I've seen nicer
than mine. And, I don't mind the door not locking. I maintain
that I'd much prefer a door ALARM system to a door LOCK system,
because I just want to scare them away BEFORE they rip
my fiberglass apart on the door, or break the plexi on
my window. But that again is just a personal perspective.
None of these add-ons are really significant.
The exception to these insignificant add-ons is the addition
of the rivethead/iflyrv10.com door pin receivers made out
of aluminum. I really wish that during my build, I would
have had the opportunity to have these, and know all the things
we know today. I think a new builder is crazy not to build
those out of aluminum. I'm not necessarily convinced that
for someone like me, with completed doors, it's an easy
upgrade to try to cut my pin ends and thread in the magnetic
ones, so I haven't gone that route. I'm also not a huge
fan of permanent or electro magnets in the doors, as I know
that I've heard enough about how sensitive good magnetometers
are to know that I'd rather avoid magnets if possible. My
doors have glassed over screws on the outside, and I just
haven't wanted to tackle any pin modifications right now.
I really HAVE been meaning to order the aluminum guides
though. I'd love to have those, and I've lost enough to
chipped paint and fiberglass from that rear pin. My
original idea was an embedded stainless striker plate to
protect the paint, and some day I'd love to be motivated
enough to fix that.
>From a functional standpoint I think the doors are fine.
They work, and I've flown now over 585 hours with them and
am not disappointed at all, other than the rear pins that
have chipped my paint. From a safety standpoint, I know
my pins go THROUGH the metal door frame, and I know that
when I latch the door all the way, it's a definite lock,
and I can't rotate my lever at all. So once I button my
family into the plane and inspect the door gaps, I know
that we're not going to lose the door.
My plane was doing it's first flight just before Van's
came out with the door warning lights. I still have the
bag of hardware on the bench, awaiting my installation.
I've read Scott's comments about how EVERYONE should
have warning lights. I can't disagree. I think warning
lights are a great idea. I also like Vic's idea of
adding a throttle position sensor to them so that they
don't light up when you're at low power for ground taxi...
because you don't want to become complacent. Personally
though, I feel that my extra-diligent operation of the
doors is REINFORCED by my lack of lights. I know a lot
about a lot of incidents that happen. People tend to
tell me when they hear things. I hadn't heard about the
recent one a couple weeks ago though. Anyway, there have
been enough departed doors that I share the concern deeply
that other builders have. But, I feel that the concern
is not for the doors....it's for the PILOTS. If you build
a door per original plans, and inspect it properly before
flight, and have pins that extend properly, you will NOT
lose a door. If I had lights, and started to look for
the lights every time in lieu of a door gap inspection,
I would become complacent and reliant on that circuitry.
Yes, you can make those light systems pretty bulletproof,
and perfectly aligned and activated...but you can't take
a sloppy pilot checklist who's rushing through his preflight
while trying to race against...well, any of the pressures
that push us, and force him to look at the lights. That
is NOT to say the lights aren't a good idea. But they
are NOT an acceptable substitute for a good door gap
inspection either. We know what happens to these doors if
they're not latched, so nothing short of a perfect
inspection is acceptable. If you give a perfect inspection,
then any and all hardware additions really, truly,
aren't necessary. They're all band-aids against poor
pilot awareness. But, for the record, I do think
the lights are a good idea. I actually have a to-do item
on my calendar that I look at weekly, to order a door
alarm system and once I find the right system, I plan
to install it with the door pin sensors and lights to
provide a loud horn alarm that I can engage with a key
FOB, as a theft deterrent, with the side benefit of having
door latch indicator lights.
Now on to the new SB. I agree, it shouldn't be mandatory.
It would have been nice to have them engage the RV-10
ownership for an acceptable fix, but they didn't. I agree
that the latch is ugly, especially from the outside.
I'm pretty confident that I won't be putting it in, at least
as-delivered. I don't want that rectangular tab outside
and the open slot for water entry any more than many people
do. I don't think it's a bad idea though, either. I think
it's not truly a NECESSARY addition, but it is a safety
device, and therefore it may prevent some operational issues
that are pilot induced, so I actually support those who feel
that it's necessary. I say GO FOR IT. If you like that
"feel good" addition to the door latching, great. I agree
that it should NOT be a mandatory SB...especially since
there are alternate methods to accomplish the same thing that
may actually look/work better and be far more visually
acceptable at the same time. Regardless, I don't think
I plan to install that particular design as delivered. I
would be more inclined to perhaps leave the slot on the
door, but NOT put the tab on the outside. Think about this
for a second, for all you people who want door locks....
Envision the same mechanism, but with just the slot.
through the slot you stick a long allen-key type key
rod. Inside the latch is a hole that this key fits
in. So, when you come up to the plane and want to
open the door, you insert the key and tip the latch.
What is the downside? Well, if you're unconscious
in the plane after a crash, rescuers can't open that
latch. But, if they can open the door handle, do you
REALLY think that one single latch is going to prevent
them from getting to you, considering how weak the
door attachment is anyway? I highly doubt it. A screwdriver
jammed in the door gap so they could open it enough to
rip the door off is about all it would take. Yeah, maybe
not perfect. You don't like the idea? I don't blame
you....I'd rather have no center latch at all.
Or how about this....you make the latch not just spring
loaded, but lock-openable from the inside. So now you
can have the "key" function as described above, but as
part of an emergency checklist you take the opportunity
to disengage that lock. Why worry about disengaging it...
the door pins will hold the door anyway. So you disengage
the lock, then do your emergency landing.
Or, take it another step further....leave an external
operating latch mechanism, but change it to a button of
some sort that has added mechanics to operate the latch.
I would be much more likely to leave a button on the outside
of my door than that square tab.
Still, none of those ideas really turn me on. I still
think that a properly latched door that is diligently
inspected, is not a worry. My final idea is one that
I've been bouncing around in my own head. I picture
attacking it from the other side...the bottom. How about
a door latch pin, L-shaped rod, that is built in to the
sidewall of the airframe by your seat. This pin can be
manually lifted, inserting the pin through the bottom
of the door. To reinforce the door, you drill a hole and
make a fiberglass hard point in the door at that spot.
So you lift the pin, it goes into the door bottom, and
then you fold the "L" tab of the pin to the side so it
isn't sticking out at you....maybe even add a machined
block into that sidewall that has 2 L-shaped recesses,
where it can recess slightly in the locked and unlocked
position. Again, this latch is only activated from inside
the cockpit, preventing rescuers from unlocking that
lock....but again, I'm SURE you could kick that door out
if that were the only pin, and I'm SURE that they could
rip it off from the outside if they needed to....and
that's in the much smaller chance that you have an
actual survivable crash....the chances are higher that
you'll be a sloppy pilot and lose the door. But, during
any portion of flight where you worry about off-airport
landings... (for instance, as I'm flying over water,
enroute to the Bahamas), you just pull that pin to the
un-latched position. You don't NEED that latch to be
secured, if the rest of the door is secured. In fact,
if you just TESTED that latch before flight, it would
PROVE your pins are secured on the door sides, and you
probably don't even need to leave the door center latch
in place. But, if you can JUST remember that this latch
is something you need to open before an emergency landing,
then it would be a fine method of compliance, and I
bet you could hide it visually better than most other
method.
I've also liked Seano's mechanical methods of adding a
3rd pin, operated by the latch. For people just starting
the build, I would actually think that if this issue
is one you're passionate about, then THAT is probably your
BEST way to deal with it. I'd LOVE to have that option
be one that an already built-and-painted door could have
added, but I doubt that's possible. I'm not obviously
passionate enough about it to rip open my door and build
such a thing, but for a new builder, hey, get him to
give you the drawings and spend some time on it...you
can avoid this ugly-a$$ latch that the SB calls for if you
do.
So the door stuff is an argument I really don't care to dive
in too deeply to. I think it all comes down to the pilot.
I think there are many good ways to prevent the problem
even with a stupid pilot. But to date, I'm not finding
any good ways to really fix the issue mechanically, in an
ideal way, on an already painted RV-10....so, I maintain
my added diligence. I have no big worries. I have 585
happy hours with the design as it is now. Can it be done
better?
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 |
|
I have just written Van's to support Scott's suggestion.
Remember that SBs are optional in the FAA's eyes, not mandatory.
And a previous post on keeping this in our hands rather than letting
some insurance adjuster get their hand in the mix is good advice.
I'm waiting for a more elegant solution for retrofit from some of our
excellent CNC engineers!!
grumpy
do not archive
On Jan 16, 2010, at 1:31 PM, Scott Schmidt wrote:
> I suggest that all RV-10 builders and flyers with serial numbers
> write Van's at info@vansaircraft.com
> I have done the same and have asked Van's to retract the Service
> Bulletin and offer the latch as an additional and optional latch
> just as the indicator lights were offered.
>
> I want to summarize what I have heard here.
> Issues with the door will arise if:
> -Poor door construction causing a bow during flight (Construction
> error) (Fix: Re-build door or add Van's center latch)
> -Pins are not inserted far enough into the aluminum frame
> (Construction error) (Fix: Re-build pins to extend into aluminum
> frame)
> -Door handle interlock is not engaged (Construction error and/or
> pilot error) (Fix: Ensure handles are locked before flight, possible
> rebuild of interlock)
> -Door pins were locked outside of cabin (Pilot error)(Fix: Add door
> check to checklist)
>
> I am fine with Van's offering this as an optional kit but when they
> say on the service bulletin that it is mandatory, I have a problem.
> This is 100% different from the previous SB where we added
> stiffeners to the vertical stabilizer and empenage.
>
> I want everyone to fly safe and keep our insurance as low as
> possible, I don't see this as the solution though.
> We need to take personal responsibility to build to the highest
> quality and use our checklists thoroughly.
> Any system that is put into place (such as our checklists) is never
> fixed with more protection devices, system only work and are
> improved through training and discipline.
>
> This solution is like adding a fixed gear to the bottom of a
> retractable landing gear aircraft. It will be there just in case you
> don't put the gear down.
>
> The warnings lights and center latch should be optional as 100% safe
> flight can be accomplished with the stock system. I do feel there
> are may pilots flying safely without even the lights because of
> their training and checklist discipline. The experimental category
> will always have construction issues and must accept personal
> responsibility for that and not burden the whole fleet with the
> quality shortcomings of the few.
>
> I want everyone to fly safe, have fun and explore this world with
> their planes and I appreciate Van's offering a system that solves a
> problem that a few of RV-10's have with the doors bowing as a total
> replacement of the door is very expensive.
>
> Again, please write Van's and ask for the removal of this SB and
> make it optional.
>
> Scott Schmidt
> scottmschmidt@yahoo.com
>
>
> From: Jim Berry <jimberry@qwest.net>
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Sat, January 16, 2010 11:24:03 AM
> Subject: RV10-List: Re: 10 SB
>
>
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing skin question |
Are folks sanding the two mating surfaces, or the top, exposed surface?
The plans seem to imply sanding the outer, exposed surfaces. I think I
would prefer sanding the mating surfaces, then prime them.
Seano wrote:
> I set the two pieces close to the end of the table and drew a
> reference line and used a 6 inch DA sander. Worked well and didn't
> take too much too fast.
>
> * **
> *
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 |
|
just talked with an IA friend about the service bulletin. It seems there was
another local RV10 which left CHD and lost the door; he had difficulty
landing due to an open baggage door and debris in the face; He lost the door
and had it fixed. A while later he again lost the door in PAN. If I
understand this situation correctly this was a purchased, not built, RV10.
This may be the same RV10 that I saw last month. A local IA was asked to fix
the nose wheel on a 10. The 10 had just been annualed by another shop and
passed the nose wheel even though it wobbled 15-20 degees each side. Shimmy
was horrible and owner (not builder) asked that it be fixed. I pointed them
to the Matco axle solution and problem was solved.
For aircraft under construction the builder can call the model anything he
desires. If I recall , Dan's aircraft (N289DT) model was Trish's ride home.
Spoken as the owner of the only E-AB "heavy".
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott Schmidt
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: 10 SB
Tim, I have been thinking the exact same thing about a latch in the center
that can only be engaged from inside the cockpit.
It would still require a high level of checklist discipline. I agree with
you on the lock, if they want in, they will get in.
I find that a cover is plenty good (out of sight out of mind) and if I ever
go to Mexico or the Baja my plan is to just take off the outside door
handles.
I am getting the sense that this SB is a CYA for Van's more than anything
from some of the comments here, VAF and personal e-mails.
Again, that is disappointing to me. From a great solution standpoint on a
scale from 1-10 I give this solution a 1 or 2.
Oh well, I think a 10 can be achieved for the same cost as the proposed.
All I would hope for is the verbiage on the SB to change from:
Required Action: Install Door Safety Latch to Required Action: Optional
Door Safety Latch
Time of Compliance: Before Further Flight to Time of Compliance:
Optional
I do believe some great ideas and great solutions will and are coming out of
this so this probably I won't take up any more of my time and I will start
coming up with some ideas that we all can share. There are a ton of super
smart and talented people on this list.
I just can't wait to see what comes out of Goeff's camp. I am expecting a
voice activited with a thumb print sensor. And from Tim I am looking for an
iPhone app that both opens and closes the doors and has a built in "Door
Ajar" alarm that is displayed on the iPhone screen.
Scott Schmidt
scottmschmidt@yahoo.com
N104XP
675 Safe Hours
_____
From: Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com>
Sent: Sun, January 17, 2010 10:39:47 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: 10 SB
I've been following the SB thread since it started, deciding not
to get into it right away. It seems that usually people start
going off on tangents about how crappy the door design is, or
how various door designs would be superior...never mind that
without some major work/time/expense there's no real way any
builder will have an improved door design. The kit "is what it
is", and if you really want the pains of major door redesign,
then hey, I'm all for it, but I believe that when it comes right
down to reality, most of you would rather just finally have a
nice flying RV-10 to fly, for a reasonable price, in a minimal
amount of years of built time. Any departure from the plans
usually adds time and expense, and a door redesign would involve
both, and only lots of testing and time would end up proving
if it were even a successful modification.
Then it comes to handles, latches, locks, and all that stuff.
Sure, there are some nice flush latches. No, Van's didn't
design in door locks. Yeah, you can buy add-on internal
handles. In reality, I don't really view ANY of these things
as significant items. They're almost entirely cosmetic,
and many of those cosmetics may mean something to various
individuals, but others may not care a bit. For me, I'm
perfectly happy with the looks of the internal door handle.
I don't mind the external handle, although I've seen nicer
than mine. And, I don't mind the door not locking. I maintain
that I'd much prefer a door ALARM system to a door LOCK system,
because I just want to scare them away BEFORE they rip
my fiberglass apart on the door, or break the plexi on
my window. But that again is just a personal perspective.
None of these add-ons are really significant.
The exception to these insignificant add-ons is the addition
of the rivethead/iflyrv10.com door pin receivers made out
of aluminum. I really wish that during my build, I would
have had the opportunity to have these, and know all the things
we know today. I think a new builder is crazy not to build
those out of aluminum. I'm not necessarily convinced that
for someone like me, with completed doors, it's an easy
upgrade to try to cut my pin ends and thread in the magnetic
ones, so I haven't gone that route. I'm also not a huge
fan of permanent or electro magnets in the doors, as I know
that I've heard enough about how sensitive good magnetometers
are to know that I'd rather avoid magnets if possible. My
doors have glassed over screws on the outside, and I just
haven't wanted to tackle any pin modifications right now.
I really HAVE been meaning to order the aluminum guides
though. I'd love to have those, and I've lost enough to
chipped paint and fiberglass from that rear pin. My
original idea was an embedded stainless striker plate to
protect the paint, and some day I'd love to be motivated
enough to fix that.
>From a functional standpoint I think the doors are fine.
They work, and I've flown now over 585 hours with them and
am not disappointed at all, other than the rear pins that
have chipped my paint. From a safety standpoint, I know
my pins go THROUGH the metal door frame, and I know that
when I latch the door all the way, it's a definite lock,
and I can't rotate my lever at all. So once I button my
family into the plane and inspect the door gaps, I know
that we're not going to lose the door.
My plane was doing it's first flight just before Van's
came out with the door warning lights. I still have the
bag of hardware on the bench, awaiting my installation.
I've read Scott's comments about how EVERYONE should
have warning lights. I can't disagree. I think warning
lights are a great idea. I also like Vic's idea of
adding a throttle position sensor to them so that they
don't light up when you're at low power for ground taxi...
because you don't want to become complacent. Personally
though, I feel that my extra-diligent operation of the
doors is REINFORCED by my lack of lights. I know a lot
about a lot of incidents that happen. People tend to
tell me when they hear things. I hadn't heard about the
recent one a couple weeks ago though. Anyway, there have
been enough departed doors that I share the concern deeply
that other builders have. But, I feel that the concern
is not for the doors....it's for the PILOTS. If you build
a door per original plans, and inspect it properly before
flight, and have pins that extend properly, you will NOT
lose a door. If I had lights, and started to look for
the lights every time in lieu of a door gap inspection,
I would become complacent and reliant on that circuitry.
Yes, you can make those light systems pretty bulletproof,
and perfectly aligned and activated...but you can't take
a sloppy pilot checklist who's rushing through his preflight
while trying to race against...well, any of the pressures
that push us, and force him to look at the lights. That
is NOT to say the lights aren't a good idea. But they
are NOT an acceptable substitute for a good door gap
inspection either. We know what happens to these doors if
they're not latched, so nothing short of a perfect
inspection is acceptable. If you give a perfect inspection,
then any and all hardware additions really, truly,
aren't necessary. They're all band-aids against poor
pilot awareness. But, for the record, I do think
the lights are a good idea. I actually have a to-do item
on my calendar that I look at weekly, to order a door
alarm system and once I find the right system, I plan
to install it with the door pin sensors and lights to
provide a loud horn alarm that I can engage with a key
FOB, as a theft deterrent, with the side benefit of having
door latch indicator lights.
Now on to the new SB. I agree, it shouldn't be mandatory.
It would have been nice to have them engage the RV-10
ownership for an acceptable fix, but they didn't. I agree
that the latch is ugly, especially from the outside.
I'm pretty confident that I won't be putting it in, at least
as-delivered. I don't want that rectangular tab outside
and the open slot for water entry any more than many people
do. I don't think it's a bad idea though, either. I think
it's not truly a NECESSARY addition, but it is a safety
device, and therefore it may prevent some operational issues
that are pilot induced, so I actually support those who feel
that it's necessary. I say GO FOR IT. If you like that
"feel good" addition to the door latching, great. I agree
that it should NOT be a mandatory SB...especially since
there are alternate methods to accomplish the same thing that
may actually look/work better and be far more visually
acceptable at the same time. Regardless, I don't think
I plan to install that particular design as delivered. I
would be more inclined to perhaps leave the slot on the
door, but NOT put the tab on the outside. Think about this
for a second, for all you people who want door locks....
Envision the same mechanism, but with just the slot.
through the slot you stick a long allen-key type key
rod. Inside the latch is a hole that this key fits
in. So, when you come up to the plane and want to
open the door, you insert the key and tip the latch.
What is the downside? Well, if you're unconscious
in the plane after a crash, rescuers can't open that
latch. But, if they can open the door handle, do you
REALLY think that one single latch is going to prevent
them from getting to you, considering how weak the
door attachment is anyway? I highly doubt it. A screwdriver
jammed in the door gap so they could open it enough to
rip the door off is about all it would take. Yeah, maybe
not perfect. You don't like the idea? I don't blame
you....I'd rather have no center latch at all.
Or how about this....you make the latch not just spring
loaded, but lock-openable from the inside. So now you
can have the "key" function as described above, but as
part of an emergency checklist you take the opportunity
to disengage that lock. Why worry about disengaging it...
the door pins will hold the door anyway. So you disengage
the lock, then do your emergency landing.
Or, take it another step further....leave an external
operating latch mechanism, but change it to a button of
some sort that has added mechanics to operate the latch.
I would be much more likely to leave a button on the outside
of my door than that square tab.
Still, none of those ideas really turn me on. I still
think that a properly latched door that is diligently
inspected, is not a worry. My final idea is one that
I've been bouncing around in my own head. I picture
attacking it from the other side...the bottom. How about
a door latch pin, L-shaped rod, that is built in to the
sidewall of the airframe by your seat. This pin can be
manually lifted, inserting the pin through the bottom
of the door. To reinforce the door, you drill a hole and
make a fiberglass hard point in the door at that spot.
So you lift the pin, it goes into the door bottom, and
then you fold the "L" tab of the pin to the side so it
isn't sticking out at you....maybe even add a machined
block into that sidewall that has 2 L-shaped recesses,
where it can recess slightly in the locked and unlocked
position. Again, this latch is only activated from inside
the cockpit, preventing rescuers from unlocking that
lock....but again, I'm SURE you could kick that door out
if that were the only pin, and I'm SURE that they could
rip it off from the outside if they needed to....and
that's in the much smaller chance that you have an
actual survivable crash....the chances are higher that
you'll be a sloppy pilot and lose the door. But, during
any portion of flight where you worry about off-airport
landings... (for instance, as I'm flying over water,
enroute to the Bahamas), you just pull that pin to the
un-latched position. You don't NEED that latch to be
secured, if the rest of the door is secured. In fact,
if you just TESTED that latch before flight, it would
PROVE your pins are secured on the door sides, and you
probably don't even need to leave the door center latch
in place. But, if you can JUST remember that this latch
is something you need to open before an emergency landing,
then it would be a fine method of compliance, and I
bet you could hide it visually better than most other
method.
I've also liked Seano's mechanical methods of adding a
3rd pin, operated by the latch. For people just starting
the build, I would actually think that if this issue
is one you're passionate about, then THAT is probably your
BEST way to deal with it. I'd LOVE to have that option
be one that an already built-and-painted door could have
added, but I doubt that's possible. I'm not obviously
passionate enough about it to rip open my door and build
such a thing, but for a new builder, hey, get him to
give you the drawings and spend some time on it...you
can avoid this ugly-a$$ latch that the SB calls for if you
do.
So the door stuff is an argument I really don't care to dive
in too deeply to. I think it all comes down to the pilot.
I think there are many good ways to prevent the problem
even with a stupid pilot. But to date, I'm not finding
any good ways to really fix the issue mechanically, in an
ideal way, on an already painted RV-10....so, I maintain
my added diligence. I have no big worries. I have 585
happy hours with the design as it is now. Can it be done
better?
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 |
|
I know I'm not the first to say this, but IMHO the real fix is to make the toothed
racks in the door handle mechanism 50% longer, so that the handle has to rotate
nearly 180 degrees to full open. Then, when closed, you'd have much more
pin engaged - hopefully so much (needs testing) that the front pin, alone, could
keep the door closed.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281969#281969
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 |
|
That is certainly a possibility. A larger gear and longer steel bars could
insure a full 180 degree throw to open or close the door; Even there the nut
on the stick could thwart the solution. The problem is that we built
experimental to avoid the nanny state (spelled FREEDOM) but others with
more money than PIC capability have purchased these aircraft and think they
are built to FAR 23 standards and conformity. The repeat offender term
applies not only to repeat builders but repeat door failures for the same
PIC.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bob Turner
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 3:02 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: 10 SB
I know I'm not the first to say this, but IMHO the real fix is to make the
toothed racks in the door handle mechanism 50% longer, so that the handle
has to rotate nearly 180 degrees to full open. Then, when closed, you'd have
much more pin engaged - hopefully so much (needs testing) that the front
pin, alone, could keep the door closed.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281969#281969
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: | Re: Wing skin question |
i just skipped the step and the wing still looks great
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com> wrote:
> Are folks sanding the two mating surfaces, or the top, exposed surface?
> The plans seem to imply sanding the outer, exposed surfaces. I think I would
> prefer sanding the mating surfaces, then prime them.
>
>
> Seano wrote:
>
> I set the two pieces close to the end of the table and drew a reference
> line and used a 6 inch DA sander. Worked well and didn't take too much too
> fast.
>
> * ***
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
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: | Wing skin question |
I may be misunderstanding the question, but , in general, when mating two
skin sections, for example at the forward spar, a small gap (.020) between
the skins must be allowed. When riveting the skins the riveting process will
close he gap. If no gap is there the edges of the skins will form a ridge
that is visible by looking down the seam. The ridge can easily be felt by
running fingers along or across the seam. Ridges are poor sheet metal form.
_____
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Trollinger
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Wing skin question
i just skipped the step and the wing still looks great
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com> wrote:
Are folks sanding the two mating surfaces, or the top, exposed surface? The
plans seem to imply sanding the outer, exposed surfaces. I think I would
prefer sanding the mating surfaces, then prime them.
Seano wrote:
I set the two pieces close to the end of the table and drew a reference line
and used a 6 inch DA sander. Worked well and didn't take too much too fast.
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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 |
|
Harbor freight had digital calipers for $16 but they go on sale
regularly. Buy a couple.
Linn
Don McDonald wrote:
> Jake, as usual, you've been given some great information.... but, as a
> once upon a time machinist, one of the the first things I would
> recommend for all builders, is the purchase of a pair of digital or dial
> calipers. They will not only save you tons of time during the build,
> you should/could ck each drill for it's size prior to each use. You
> will never use the wrong drill if you ck it with the calipers first.
> Most of us old guys can't read the damn number/fractions on the drills
> anyway. The whole match drill final drill process is to first insure
> alignment, and then if not final drilled, a 3/32 rivet will not go into
> a 3/32 hole... ok, if it does, it won't go willingly.... and if we're
> going to set 10,000 plus of the dang things, then we want them to go
> willingly.
> Jake, where are you located? If close enough, I'd fly over and give you
> a quick lesson and the many uses of the calipers. (Pascal, does this
> ring any bells) A good example is making bushings/spacers, most people
> would lay a scale/tape measure of sorts onto the tubing and scribe a
> line.... with the calipers you just set the desired dimension, lock the
> caliper, and use the calipers as your scribe. Same measurement, every time.
> Don McDonald
>
> --- On *Sun, 1/17/10, Perry, Phil /<Phil.Perry@netapp.com>/* wrote:
>
>
> From: Perry, Phil <Phil.Perry@netapp.com>
> Subject: RE: RV10-List: bit sizes
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Date: Sunday, January 17, 2010, 8:50 AM
>
> <Phil.Perry@netapp.com
> <http://us.mc537.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Phil.Perry@netapp.com>>
>
> Jake,
>
> The numbered bits are slightly larger than the fractional.
>
> You'll initially drill all of your holes with a fractional bit. 3/32,
> 1/8, etc.... That process is referred to as "Match Drilling" in Van's
> plans. This means you're getting all the parts in the proper position
> and drilling an undersized pilot hole to get the parts to align and
> "Match".
>
> After you've accomplished "Match Drilling", then you "Final Drill".
>
> This is the process where you use the numbered drill sizes to slightly
> enlarge the hole to the proper size.
>
> You'll want to pay close attention to the terms "match" vs "final" when
> you're reading the plans.
>
> I believe there's a little more detail in Section 5 on this topic. It's
> not bundled inside your larger plans book, but is a smaller book that
> came in its own folder with the kit. Mine came with a red cover....
>
> Phil
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: JHearnsberger [mailto:jakehearnsberger@gmail.com
> <http://us.mc537.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>]
>
> Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 9:52 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> <http://us.mc537.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RV10-List: bit sizes
>
> <jakehearnsberger@gmail.com
> <http://us.mc537.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=jakehearnsberger@gmail.com>>
>
> I am getting ready to drill on the rear spar. I am confused about the
> bit sizes. I see that #30 is not the same as 1/8". But, they look fairly
> close.
>
> Can you use #30 for 1/8", #40 for 3/32", and #10 for 3/16"?
>
> Or when the say use 1/8" drill, use 1/8"?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jake
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281903#2819p://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List"
> sp;-->
> <http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281903#281903>http://f=
> - List Contributionsp; &bsp;-->
> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>
>
> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
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 |
|
Miller John wrote:
> I have just written Van's to support Scott's suggestion.
>
> Remember that SBs are optional in the FAA's eyes, not mandatory.
OK, so they just slap you with 91.13:
Sec. 91.13 - Careless or reckless operation.
(a) Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No person may
operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger
the life or property of another.
(b) Aircraft operations other than for the purpose of air navigation. No
person may operate an aircraft, other than for the purpose of air
navigation, on any part of the surface of an airport used by aircraft
for air commerce (including areas used by those aircraft for receiving
or discharging persons or cargo), in a careless or reckless manner so as
to endanger the life or property of another.
If they want you, they will get you. Trust me.
Linn
>
> And a previous post on keeping this in our hands rather than letting
> some insurance adjuster get their hand in the mix is good advice.
>
> I'm waiting for a more elegant solution for retrofit from some of our
> excellent CNC engineers!!
>
> grumpy
> do not archive
>
> On Jan 16, 2010, at 1:31 PM, Scott Schmidt wrote:
>
>> I suggest that all RV-10 builders and flyers with serial numbers write
>> Van's at info@vansaircraft.com <mailto:info@vansaircraft.com>
>> I have done the same and have asked Van's to retract the Service
>> Bulletin and offer the latch as an additional and optional latch just
>> as the indicator lights were offered.
>>
>> I want to summarize what I have heard here.
>> Issues with the door will arise if:
>> -Poor door construction causing a bow during flight (Construction
>> error) (Fix: Re-build door or add Van's center latch)
>> -Pins are not inserted far enough into the aluminum frame
>> (Construction error) (Fix: Re-build pins to extend into aluminum frame)
>> -Door handle interlock is not engaged (Construction error and/or pilot
>> error) (Fix: Ensure handles are locked before flight, possible rebuild
>> of interlock)
>> -Door pins were locked outside of cabin (Pilot error)(Fix: Add door
>> check to checklist)
>>
>> I am fine with Van's offering this as an optional kit but when they
>> say on the service bulletin that it is mandatory, I have a problem.
>> This is 100% different from the previous SB where we added stiffeners
>> to the vertical stabilizer and empenage.
>>
>> I want everyone to fly safe and keep our insurance as low as possible,
>> I don't see this as the solution though.
>> We need to take personal responsibility to build to the highest
>> quality and use our checklists thoroughly.
>> Any system that is put into place (such as our checklists) is never
>> fixed with more protection devices, system only work and are improved
>> through training and discipline.
>>
>> This solution is like adding a fixed gear to the bottom of a
>> retractable landing gear aircraft. It will be there just in case you
>> don't put the gear down.
>>
>> The warnings lights and center latch should be optional as 100% safe
>> flight can be accomplished with the stock system. I do feel there are
>> may pilots flying safely without even the lights because of their
>> training and checklist discipline. The experimental category will
>> always have construction issues and must accept personal
>> responsibility for that and not burden the whole fleet with the
>> quality shortcomings of the few.
>>
>> I want everyone to fly safe, have fun and explore this world with
>> their planes and I appreciate Van's offering a system that solves a
>> problem that a few of RV-10's have with the doors bowing as a total
>> replacement of the door is very expensive.
>>
>> Again, please write Van's and ask for the removal of this SB and make
>> it optional.
>>
>> Scott Schmidt
>> scottmschmidt@yahoo.com <mailto:scottmschmidt@yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* Jim Berry <jimberry@qwest.net <mailto:jimberry@qwest.net>>
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> *Sent:* Sat, January 16, 2010 11:24:03 AM
>> *Subject:* RV10-List: Re: 10 SB
>>
>> *
>>
>> ===================================
>> tp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ===================================
>> nics.com
>> ===================================
>> w.matronics.com/contribution
>> ===================================
>>
>> *
>>
>
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
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 |
|
Because they are bound to break from HF
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 17, 2010, at 15:58, Linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
> >
>
> Harbor freight had digital calipers for $16 but they go on sale
> regularly. Buy a couple.
> Linn
>
> Don McDonald wrote:
>> Jake, as usual, you've been given some great information.... but,
>> as a once upon a time machinist, one of the the first things I
>> would recommend for all builders, is the purchase of a pair of
>> digital or dial calipers. They will not only save you tons of time
>> during the build, you should/could ck each drill for it's size
>> prior to each use. You will never use the wrong drill if you ck it
>> with the calipers first. Most of us old guys can't read the damn
>> number/fractions on the drills anyway. The whole match drill final
>> drill process is to first insure alignment, and then if not final
>> drilled, a 3/32 rivet will not go into a 3/32 hole... ok, if it
>> does, it won't go willingly.... and if we're going to set 10,000
>> plus of the dang things, then we want them to go willingly.
>> Jake, where are you located? If close enough, I'd fly over and
>> give you a quick lesson and the many uses of the calipers.
>> (Pascal, does this ring any bells) A good example is making
>> bushings/spacers, most people would lay a scale/tape measure of
>> sorts onto the tubing and scribe a line.... with the calipers you
>> just set the desired dimension, lock the caliper, and use the
>> calipers as your scribe. Same measurement, every time.
>> Don McDonald --- On *Sun, 1/17/10, Perry, Phil /<Phil.Perry@netapp.com
>> >/* wrote:
>> From: Perry, Phil <Phil.Perry@netapp.com>
>> Subject: RE: RV10-List: bit sizes
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Sunday, January 17, 2010, 8:50 AM
>> <Phil.Perry@netapp.com
>> <http://us.mc537.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Phil.Perry@netapp.com
>> >>
>> Jake,
>> The numbered bits are slightly larger than the fractional.
>> You'll initially drill all of your holes with a fractional bit.
>> 3/32,
>> 1/8, etc.... That process is referred to as "Match Drilling" in
>> Van's
>> plans. This means you're getting all the parts in the proper
>> position
>> and drilling an undersized pilot hole to get the parts to align
>> and
>> "Match".
>> After you've accomplished "Match Drilling", then you "Final
>> Drill".
>> This is the process where you use the numbered drill sizes to
>> slightly
>> enlarge the hole to the proper size.
>> You'll want to pay close attention to the terms "match" vs
>> "final" when
>> you're reading the plans.
>> I believe there's a little more detail in Section 5 on this
>> topic. It's
>> not bundled inside your larger plans book, but is a smaller book
>> that
>> came in its own folder with the kit. Mine came with a red
>> cover....
>> Phil
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: JHearnsberger [mailto:jakehearnsberger@gmail.com
>> <http://us.mc537.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=jakehearnsberger@gmail.com
>> >]
>> Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 9:52 AM
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> <http://us.mc537.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=rv10-list@matronics.com
>> >
>> Subject: RV10-List: bit sizes
>> <jakehearnsberger@gmail.com
>> <http://us.mc537.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=jakehearnsberger@gmail.com
>> >>
>> I am getting ready to drill on the rear spar. I am confused
>> about the
>> bit sizes. I see that #30 is not the same as 1/8". But, they
>> look fairly
>> close.
>> Can you use #30 for 1/8", #40 for 3/32", and #10 for 3/16"?
>> Or when the say use 1/8" drill, use 1/8"?
>> Thanks,
>> Jake
>> Read this topic online here:
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281903#2819p://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> "
>> sp;-->
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281903#281903>http://f=
>> - List Contributionsp; &bsp;-->
>> <http://forums.matronics.com/>
>> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>> *
>> *
>
>
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 |
|
>>
>> Harbor freight had digital calipers for $16 but they go on sale
>> regularly. Buy a couple.
>
> Because they are bound to break from HF
>
My digital caliper from Harbor Freight is over 4 years old now and
still works fine. I think I paid $10 for it. Even if they do break
eventually, the price is cheap enough that you can just buy another one.
I bought four of their digital multimeters at $3 a pop thinking they
would also break easily. Guess what, I'm still using the first one that
I opened four years ago, still working fine too.
-Dj
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I guess I just have bad luck there. Everything I have bought from there didn't
last long. I'm a caveman though, I can break anything. My wife told me I should
be the test dummy for garden tools because I have broke all of ours.
Do the digital calipers stay accurate?
Same reason I don't like Craftsmen. I tried to return my ratchets and they are
always out because everyone else is returning their ratchets. I will pay extra
to have something that I don't have to return or go back and re-purchase.
What it comes down to is that I don't know what lasts and doesn't last at Harbor
Freight.
--------
Cust. #40936
RV-10 SB Fuselage
N801VR reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281985#281985
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Snap-On.....you don't dare want to break! them...same great warranty though...
------Original Message------
From: Strasnuts
Sender: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
ReplyTo: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Jan 17, 2010 4:21 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: bit sizes
I guess I just have bad luck there. Everything I have bought from there didn't
last long. I'm a caveman though, I can break anything. My wife told me I should
be the test dummy for garden tools because I have broke all of ours.
Do the digital calipers stay accurate?
Same reason I don't like Craftsmen. I tried to return my ratchets and they are
always out because everyone else is returning their ratchets. I will pay extra
to have something that I don't have to return or go back and re-purchase.
What it comes down to is that I don't know what lasts and doesn't last at Harbor
Freight.
--------
Cust. #40936
RV-10 SB Fuselage
N801VR reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281985#281985
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
Message 32
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Flap motor rod travel |
Thanks for the info, I was afraid I would need to wait, thats probably best. Just
was hoping someone beat me too the design.
-Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of johngoodman
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 10:46 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Flap motor rod travel
[quote="toaster73(at)embarqmail.c"]I am trying to set up my flap position sensor
(ray allen) but the wings are not on yet. Can someone tell me how far the rod
travels out of the motor assembly? Does it start fully retracted (reflex position)
and then move X inches out of the motor assembly which would be full
flaps? I need to know X. Does this make sense?
Thanks
Chris
#40072
> [b]
Chris,
I am also using the Ray Allen position sensor (the VP200 needs it), so I removed
and sold the Van's unit. The limited travel of the RA means you will have to
position the rod very close to axis. I calculated about an inch, which is very
close to the nearest lightening hole at the axis. I put a unique little spacer
I found at Ace Hardware in the hole. It has a threaded hole in it. I mounted
the RA with double-sided tape and ran the motor full throw. No matter what you
do, it will pull the RA off the tape, one way or the other.
There is another RV-10 in the hangar with me and I tried to figure it out on theirs,
with limited success. I have decided that I will leave the RA loose for
now, and once the flaps are on, find the right place. I suspect I will need to
offset the mounting point a little more towards the axis. A task for another
day.
John
--------
#40572 QB. Engine on, wing attach coming soon. Panel delivery soon.
N711JG reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=281625#281625
Message 33
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Seano wrote:
>
> Because they are bound to break from HF
Well, if you use them in place of a hammer ......
I've had better use of mine than some 'good' tools.
Linn
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 17, 2010, at 15:58, Linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Harbor freight had digital calipers for $16 but they go on sale
>> regularly. Buy a couple.
>> Linn
>>
Message 34
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing skin question |
My plans stated this was an "optional step". I elected to skip it and my wings
look just fine.
David Clifford
RV-10 In Progress
Empennage Done
Engine Overhauled & Pickled
Closing up The Wings
----- Original Message -----
From: "DLM" <dlm46007@cox.net>
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 5:42:15 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Wing skin question
I may be misunderstanding the question, but , in general, when mating two skin
sections, for example at the forward spar, a small gap (.020) between the skins
must be allowed. When riveting the skins the riveting process will close he
gap. If no gap is there the edges of the skins will form a ridge that is visible
by looking down the seam. The ridge can easily be felt by running fingers along
or across the seam. Ridges are poor sheet metal form.
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Trollinger
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 3:25 PM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Wing skin question
i just skipped the step and the wing still looks great
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Kelly McMullen < kellym@aviating.com > wrote:
Are folks sanding the two mating surfaces, or the top, exposed surface? The plans
seem to imply sanding the outer, exposed surfaces. I think I would prefer sanding
the mating surfaces, then prime them.
Seano wrote:
I set the two pieces close to the end of the table and drew a reference line and
used a 6 inch DA sander. Worked well and didn't take too much too fast.
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">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 35
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Wing skin question |
Bill
Get yourself a 5" random orbital sander to do the feathering of that
edge. I have a lot of experience using them for woodworking projects
and they are an excellent sander, easy to control and won't give you a
nasty surprise. I wouldn't go near a belt sander with aluminum for
anything....Rick
----- Original Message -----
From: Billy & Tami Britton
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Wing skin question
That's exactly what I''m asking about. Is it a slow process or does
the metal come off pretty quickly. I have a belt sander but I know how
fast you can mess things up with it. It's looking like I'll probably
just use a hand powered sander and see how that goes.
Thanks to all that have replied.
Bill
From: Rick
Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 9:42 AM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Wing skin question
Bill,
Are you talking about feathering the edges on the overlap? If so, I
used a belt sander and finished it up with a vixen file. Sorry don't
have the plans in front to reference the page.
Rick
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Billy & Tami
Britton
Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 3:56 PM
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Subject: RV10-List: Wing skin question
Page 16-2 step 5. Wing skin joint detail. I kinda understand what
it's asking me to do but does anybody have any pics of exactly what it
wants. How is the best way to accomplish this job?
Thanks in advance,
Bill
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhttp://forums.matronics.comht
tp://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
Message 36
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | doors & insulation |
I've completed the assembly of the doors and now wish I would've insulated inside.
I'm thinking about squirting some minimal expanding foam to insulate and
solidify the door. Has anyone done that or can see any reason not to do this?
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 flying
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=282022#282022
Message 37
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: doors & insulation |
IMHO.....that's a good way to make your doors bulge or even break from expansion
of the foam Also consider that the foam isn't that light either...
------Original Message------
From: rvdave
Sender: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
ReplyTo: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Jan 17, 2010 8:21 PM
Subject: RV10-List: doors & insulation
I've completed the assembly of the doors and now wish I would've insulated inside.
I'm thinking about squirting some minimal expanding foam to insulate and
solidify the door. Has anyone done that or can see any reason not to do this?
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 flying
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=282022#282022
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
Message 38
| 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: | doors & insulation |
It will bulge your doors. It will cure in certain areas first then the uncu
red stuff will continue to expand and push on the already cured stuff.
If the door weren't pink=2C it would look like the stay puff marshmellow ma
n by the time it finishes curing.
> Subject: RV10-List: doors & insulation
> From: davidbf@centurytel.net
> Date: Sun=2C 17 Jan 2010 20:21:40 -0800
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>
>
> I've completed the assembly of the doors and now wish I would've insulate
d inside. I'm thinking about squirting some minimal expanding foam to insul
ate and solidify the door. Has anyone done that or can see any reason not t
o do this?
>
> --------
> Dave Ford
> RV6 flying
> RV10 building
> Cadillac=2C MI
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=282022#282022
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
Message 39
| 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: doors & insulation |
Dave, I like what Van says, "just buy the best noise reduction headsets".
In a way he is correct. What I have found is that the inside of the RV-10 it is
very quiet compared to many other airplanes.
I also have found that the majority of my door noise comes from the hinges on the
top. If I put my hands over them it is even more quiet.
Someday that will be my next project. I would not worry about sound proofing the
inside of the doors just think about isolating the noise around those hinges
if you want. The hinges are also very close to your ears.
Scott Schmidt
scottmschmidt@yahoo.com
________________________________
From: rvdave <davidbf@centurytel.net>
Sent: Sun, January 17, 2010 9:21:40 PM
Subject: RV10-List: doors & insulation
I've completed the assembly of the doors and now wish I would've insulated inside.
I'm thinking about squirting some minimal expanding foam to insulate and
solidify the door. Has anyone done that or can see any reason not to do this?
--------
Dave Ford
RV6 flying
RV10 building
Cadillac, MI
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=282022#282022
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! --
|