Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:17 AM - Re: Kiwi RV-10 #2 (Tony Woods)
2. 04:16 AM - Re: Comm Antenna (jkreidler)
3. 04:23 AM - Re: Great Lakes RV Gathering (jkreidler)
4. 06:18 AM - Re: Comm Antennas (Richard Martin)
5. 06:23 AM - Re: EGT probes (Tim Olson)
6. 06:41 AM - Re: survey (David Watterson)
7. 06:58 AM - Re: survey (Deems Davis)
8. 07:27 AM - Re: EGT probes (DLM)
9. 07:43 AM - ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner. (Perry, Phil)
10. 08:08 AM - Re: EGT probes (Tim Olson)
11. 08:41 AM - Re: EGT probes (DLM)
12. 08:59 AM - Re: EGT probes (Tim Olson)
13. 10:04 AM - Re: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner. (Tim Olson)
14. 10:26 AM - Re: Comm Antennas (Bob Turner)
15. 10:34 AM - Re: EGT probes (Bob Turner)
16. 10:54 AM - Re: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner. (Perry, Phil)
17. 11:45 AM - RV-10 losses against the finite pool of insured's (John Cox)
18. 12:12 PM - Re: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner. (Seano)
19. 12:20 PM - Weld-On 10 for Sale (Jeff Carpenter)
20. 12:43 PM - Brother's keepers (woxofswa)
21. 12:54 PM - Re: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner. (Tim Olson)
22. 01:41 PM - Re: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner. (Seano)
23. 02:04 PM - Re: Brother's keepers ()
24. 02:36 PM - Re: Brother's keepers (Condrey, Bob (US SSA))
25. 02:38 PM - Re: RV-10 losses against the finite pool of insured's (Danny Riggs)
26. 02:53 PM - Re: Brother's keepers (woxofswa)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Builder 40583. And yep - I think this kit has sat in a garage for several
years... Now it is scattered all over the lounge :-)
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
Sent: Monday, 7 June 2010 3:00 p.m.
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Kiwi RV-10 #2
Builder number?
Kelly
40866
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Tony Woods <twoods@sesa.af> wrote:
> My empennage kit just arrived!
>
>
> New Zealand has its second RV10 underway. Let the journey begin.
>
>
> Tony
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: Comm Antenna |
With the antenna mounted that far aft you might want to verify that the tail hits
the ground before the antenna.
--------
Jason Kreidler
4 Partner Build - Sheboygan Falls, WI
Tony Kolar, Kyle Hokel, Wayne Elser, Jason Kreidler
N44YH - Flying - #40617
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=300307#300307
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Great Lakes RV Gathering |
All, just a reminder that this coming Saturday June 12 we will be hosting the Great
Lakes RV Gathering @ KSBM. Thanks to everyone who has replied so far, if
you plan to attend please let us know so we can have enough lunch for everyone.
We will kick it off at 10, lunch around 12.
All RVer's, all stages welcome.
--------
Jason Kreidler
4 Partner Build - Sheboygan Falls, WI
Tony Kolar, Kyle Hokel, Wayne Elser, Jason Kreidler
N44YH - Flying - #40617
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=300308#300308
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Comm Antennas |
consider one Dorne & Margolen (DM) antenna on the belly with a diplexer
inside of the airplane. The DM antenna will increase your range
substantially and the diplexer will eliminate the need for 2 antennae. I
noticed that after I installed the DM antenna (removed the comants) my range
increased by at least 50 percent.
good luck.
Dick Martin
RV8 N233m
the fast one
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Kelly McMullen <apilot2@gmail.com> wrote:
> Les,
> That might be a good location for one antenna. Putting two antennas within
> about 2 ft of each other is not good.
> I'd consider either mounting one near an access panel on underside of wing
> or far enough back in the tail cone to have more than 3 ft separation
> between antennas. Alternatives include a Bob Archer wingtip Com antenna, an
> antenna on the top of the fuselage. The more separation you can get, the
> better. Of course you also need to consider separation from your ELT antenna
> and from GPS antenna.
>
> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Les Kearney <kearney@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I am planning on installing two Comant CI-122 antennas tomorrow. My plan
>> is to fab doublers and install the antennas / doublers just aft and inboard
>> of the fuse steps. My reason for this is I have inspection panels in that
>> area for the steps so it seems like a good choice. I am not keen on
>> installing anything where access is a problem.
>>
>> Can anyone thing of reasons to not do what I plan? Are there better
>> options for these antennas?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Les
>> #40643
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> *
>>
>>
> *
>
> *
>
>
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 |
|
Following up on this....
This weekend I had my first real hard EGT probe failure. It went
from working fine to reading 70-90 degrees, while all other
engine parameters and temps were normal. So it looks like I
finally failed an EGT probe from wear/burnout. I'm at
just over 625 hours, on the black type GRT probes. Now that
I had one go, I'll probably just replace the whole set of 6,
and keep the other 5 for spares or swap-in testing/troubleshooting.
Out of curiosity David, what did you find for the difference
in price between the EI probes, and the GRT white colored
better quality probes?
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
DLM wrote:
> I talked to Sandy and the very low reading indicates it is open and
> reading the temp of the internal EIS. My number two was like that and
> when removed was burn off to 3/8" I sent the list a picture recently. I
> am going to buy a set of EI quick response probes. I have been assured
> that they will work in place of the GRT probes (we will see). Got a good
> quote.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Marcus Cooper <mailto:coop85@verizon.net>
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 16, 2010 3:56 PM
> *Subject:* RE: RV10-List: EGT probes
>
> Its probably been covered, but what where your indications of a
> probe failure? Ive got one on the fritz reading a constant very
> low temp but I dont know if its the wiring or the probe gone bad.
> I also have the GRT setup and 450 hours TT.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *DLM
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 16, 2010 5:50 PM
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* RV10-List: EGT probes
>
>
>
> Any suggestions for long life EGT probes? I have 278 TT on my RV10
> and have replaced 3 EGT probes from GRT. Failures have been on 6
> then 4 (or 2) then 1. #2 failed this morning. Some are the original
> GRT EIS probes and some are their allegedly long life probes. I lost
> the third one on a trip to IL and GRT FEDEXed two "long life" probes
> to IL. I changed #1 and kept the spare. This morning on a local
> training flight, #2 failed (again?). Probes are located 2 inches
> below the exhaust port (specs call 2-6"). EGTs normally see high
> 1300 /low 1400 in cruise. takeoff and climb EGTs are 1200-1350. At
> altitude the LOP operation usually provided CHTs (275-325) and EGTs
> (1360-1410). GEM probes on a previous aircraft (TC177RG) were rated
> for 1650 F red line and since my normal operation was about EGTs at
> 1400. I replaced two probes in 29 years of ownership and 2500
> hours. I have now replaced 4 GRT probes in 278 hours. I am
> considering a completely new set of Alcor or GEM probes
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> - The RV10-List Email Forum utilities such as List
> Photoshare, and much much -->
> http://www.matronic================
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
>
> - content also available via the Web -->
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>http://forums.matronics.comstyle='mso-spacerun:yes'>
> - List Contribution Web Site style='mso-spacerun:yes'> Thank you
> for your generous
> style='mso-spacerun:yes'> -Matt
> style='mso-spacerun:yes'> --> http://www.matronics.com/c
> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>
> * * <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>
> *
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List* <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
> *href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
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 |
|
1800 rpm...1620-1640, 20 drop difference
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DLM
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 2010 3:13 PM
Subject: RV10-List: survey
What rpm is being used for the magneto check and what limits are considered
acceptable? magneto drop? and drop difference?
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 |
|
I was getting similar drops as David indicated when doing Mag checks @
1800. I now do them @ 2000 RPM and see a drop of only 100 RPM.
Deems Davis
N519PJ
www.deemsrv10.com
On 6/7/2010 6:36 AM, David Watterson wrote:
>
> 1800 rpm.....1620-1640, 20 drop difference
>
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *DLM
> *Sent:* Saturday, June 05, 2010 3:13 PM
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* RV10-List: survey
>
> What rpm is being used for the magneto check and what limits are
> considered acceptable? magneto drop? and drop difference?
>
> * *
> * *
> **
> **
> **
> **
> **
> **
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List*
> **
> **
> **
> *http://forums.matronics.com*
> **
> **
> **
> **
> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
> **
> * *
> *
>
>
> *
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 |
|
The GRT probes $45 and $36; The EI probes were $70; total was $433 including
shipping. These ae the fine point probes and are the small diameter probes;
the list for $104. I called and talked to Matt at EI. These are fast
response P-110.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@myrv10.com>
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 6:22 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: EGT probes
Following up on this....
This weekend I had my first real hard EGT probe failure. It went
from working fine to reading 70-90 degrees, while all other
engine parameters and temps were normal. So it looks like I
finally failed an EGT probe from wear/burnout. I'm at
just over 625 hours, on the black type GRT probes. Now that
I had one go, I'll probably just replace the whole set of 6,
and keep the other 5 for spares or swap-in testing/troubleshooting.
Out of curiosity David, what did you find for the difference
in price between the EI probes, and the GRT white colored
better quality probes?
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
DLM wrote:
> I talked to Sandy and the very low reading indicates it is open and
> reading the temp of the internal EIS. My number two was like that and when
> removed was burn off to 3/8" I sent the list a picture recently. I am
> going to buy a set of EI quick response probes. I have been assured that
> they will work in place of the GRT probes (we will see). Got a good quote.
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Marcus Cooper <mailto:coop85@verizon.net>
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 16, 2010 3:56 PM
> *Subject:* RE: RV10-List: EGT probes
>
> Its probably been covered, but what where your indications of a
> probe failure? Ive got one on the fritz reading a constant very
> low temp but I dont know if its the wiring or the probe gone bad. I
> also have the GRT setup and 450 hours TT.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Marcus
>
>
> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *DLM
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 16, 2010 5:50 PM
> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* RV10-List: EGT probes
>
>
> Any suggestions for long life EGT probes? I have 278 TT on my RV10
> and have replaced 3 EGT probes from GRT. Failures have been on 6
> then 4 (or 2) then 1. #2 failed this morning. Some are the original
> GRT EIS probes and some are their allegedly long life probes. I lost
> the third one on a trip to IL and GRT FEDEXed two "long life" probes
> to IL. I changed #1 and kept the spare. This morning on a local
> training flight, #2 failed (again?). Probes are located 2 inches
> below the exhaust port (specs call 2-6"). EGTs normally see high
> 1300 /low 1400 in cruise. takeoff and climb EGTs are 1200-1350. At
> altitude the LOP operation usually provided CHTs (275-325) and EGTs
> (1360-1410). GEM probes on a previous aircraft (TC177RG) were rated
> for 1650 F red line and since my normal operation was about EGTs at
> 1400. I replaced two probes in 29 years of ownership and 2500
> hours. I have now replaced 4 GRT probes in 278 hours. I am
> considering a completely new set of Alcor or GEM probes
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> - The RV10-List Email Forum utilities such as List
> Photoshare, and much much -->
> http://www.matronic================
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
>
> - content also available via the Web -->
>
> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>http://forums.matronics.comstyle='mso-spacerun:yes'>
> - List Contribution Web Site style='mso-spacerun:yes'> Thank
> you
> for your generous
> style='mso-spacerun:yes'> -Matt
> style='mso-spacerun:yes'> --> http://www.matronics.com/c
> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>
> * * <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>
> *
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List*
> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
> *href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner. |
I'm not sure if any of you saw this, but I found it on the EAA's site
this morning. It's worth reading.
Full Article......
http://www.eaa.org/news/2010/2010-06-03_ads-b.asp
---Snip---Snip---
EAA has long favored a satellite-based tracking system, provided that it
would benefit aircraft operators as well as the national airspace
system. Unfortunately, FAA has only mandated what's called ADS-B (out),
which sends tracking information to the air traffic system.
EAA has long held that the benefit to pilots would be from systems that
allow us to receive traffic, weather, and safety information in the
cockpit (ADS-B in). Without that element, the new mandate directly
serves only FAA air traffic control.
"What this new rule does is shift the cost of aircraft tracking from the
government's mammoth ground-based radar systems to the cockpit and the
individual pilot," said Doug Macnair, EAA's vice president of government
relations. "It makes sense to migrate to new satellite-based technology
based on ADS-B, which would replace existing transponders and encoders.
But if the aircraft owner has to pay for it, pilots should also receive
substantial safety and operational benefits."
---Snip---Snip---
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 |
|
I'm not sure if I'd want to go smaller if they're much smaller in
diameter though.....additional exhaust leakage could erode the hole,
at least unless you can get a tight seal even though they're
skinnier. My original GRT probes were plenty fast in response for
me....but that does bring up the issue of I need to also find out if
the "better" GRT probes are the same diameter an response. The old
probes served me real well except I'd have hoped for 1,000 hours or so
on the lifetime. Not sure what's practical....I've never flown a
plane over 625 hours before, so I don't know what expected lifetime is.
Tim
On Jun 7, 2010, at 9:14 AM, "DLM" <dlm46007@cox.net> wrote:
>
> The GRT probes $45 and $36; The EI probes were $70; total was $433
> including shipping. These ae the fine point probes and are the small
> diameter probes; the list for $104. I called and talked to Matt at
> EI. These are fast response P-110.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@myrv10.com>
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 6:22 AM
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: EGT probes
>
>
>
> Following up on this....
>
> This weekend I had my first real hard EGT probe failure. It went
> from working fine to reading 70-90 degrees, while all other
> engine parameters and temps were normal. So it looks like I
> finally failed an EGT probe from wear/burnout. I'm at
> just over 625 hours, on the black type GRT probes. Now that
> I had one go, I'll probably just replace the whole set of 6,
> and keep the other 5 for spares or swap-in testing/troubleshooting.
>
> Out of curiosity David, what did you find for the difference
> in price between the EI probes, and the GRT white colored
> better quality probes?
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
> do not archive
>
>
> DLM wrote:
>> I talked to Sandy and the very low reading indicates it is open and
>> reading the temp of the internal EIS. My number two was like that
>> and when removed was burn off to 3/8" I sent the list a picture
>> recently. I am going to buy a set of EI quick response probes. I
>> have been assured that they will work in place of the GRT probes
>> (we will see). Got a good quote.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Marcus Cooper <mailto:coop85@verizon.net>
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, May 16, 2010 3:56 PM
>> *Subject:* RE: RV10-List: EGT probes
>>
>> Its probably been covered, but what where your indications of a
>> probe failure? Ive got one on the fritz reading a constant v
>> ery
>> low temp but I dont know if its the wiring or the probe
>> gone bad. I also have the GRT setup and 450 hours TT.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> <mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *DLM
>> *Sent:* Sunday, May 16, 2010 5:50 PM
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
>> *Subject:* RV10-List: EGT probes
>>
>>
>> Any suggestions for long life EGT probes? I have 278 TT on my RV10
>> and have replaced 3 EGT probes from GRT. Failures have been on 6
>> then 4 (or 2) then 1. #2 failed this morning. Some are the
>> original
>> GRT EIS probes and some are their allegedly long life probes. I
>> lost
>> the third one on a trip to IL and GRT FEDEXed two "long life"
>> probes
>> to IL. I changed #1 and kept the spare. This morning on a local
>> training flight, #2 failed (again?). Probes are located 2 inches
>> below the exhaust port (specs call 2-6"). EGTs normally see high
>> 1300 /low 1400 in cruise. takeoff and climb EGTs are 1200-1350. At
>> altitude the LOP operation usually provided CHTs (275-325) and
>> EGTs
>> (1360-1410). GEM probes on a previous aircraft (TC177RG) were
>> rated
>> for 1650 F red line and since my normal operation was about
>> EGTs at
>> 1400. I replaced two probes in 29 years of ownership and 2500
>> hours. I have now replaced 4 GRT probes in 278 hours. I am
>> considering a completely new set of Alcor or GEM probes
>>
>> * *
>>
>> * *
>>
>> - The RV10-List Email Forum utilities such as List
>> Photoshare, and much much -->
>> http://www.matronic================
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
>>
>> - content also available via the Web -->
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>http://forums.matronics.comstyle='mso-spacerun:yes'
>> > - List Contribution Web Site style='mso-
>> spacerun:yes'> Thank you
>> for your generous
>> style='mso-spacerun:yes'> -Matt
>> style='mso-spacerun:yes'> --> http://www.matronics.com/c
>> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>>
>> * * <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>>
>> *
>>
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List*
>> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>> *href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>
>
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 |
|
The probes are the same size as the GRT; that is why a chose them ; i would
not need to redrill the holes.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 8:09 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: EGT probes
I'm not sure if I'd want to go smaller if they're much smaller in
diameter though.....additional exhaust leakage could erode the hole,
at least unless you can get a tight seal even though they're
skinnier. My original GRT probes were plenty fast in response for
me....but that does bring up the issue of I need to also find out if
the "better" GRT probes are the same diameter an response. The old
probes served me real well except I'd have hoped for 1,000 hours or so
on the lifetime. Not sure what's practical....I've never flown a
plane over 625 hours before, so I don't know what expected lifetime is.
Tim
On Jun 7, 2010, at 9:14 AM, "DLM" <dlm46007@cox.net> wrote:
>
> The GRT probes $45 and $36; The EI probes were $70; total was $433
> including shipping. These ae the fine point probes and are the small
> diameter probes; the list for $104. I called and talked to Matt at EI.
> These are fast response P-110.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@myrv10.com>
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 6:22 AM
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: EGT probes
>
>
>
> Following up on this....
>
> This weekend I had my first real hard EGT probe failure. It went
> from working fine to reading 70-90 degrees, while all other
> engine parameters and temps were normal. So it looks like I
> finally failed an EGT probe from wear/burnout. I'm at
> just over 625 hours, on the black type GRT probes. Now that
> I had one go, I'll probably just replace the whole set of 6,
> and keep the other 5 for spares or swap-in testing/troubleshooting.
>
> Out of curiosity David, what did you find for the difference
> in price between the EI probes, and the GRT white colored
> better quality probes?
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
> do not archive
>
>
> DLM wrote:
>> I talked to Sandy and the very low reading indicates it is open and
>> reading the temp of the internal EIS. My number two was like that and
>> when removed was burn off to 3/8" I sent the list a picture recently. I
>> am going to buy a set of EI quick response probes. I have been assured
>> that they will work in place of the GRT probes (we will see). Got a good
>> quote.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Marcus Cooper <mailto:coop85@verizon.net>
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, May 16, 2010 3:56 PM
>> *Subject:* RE: RV10-List: EGT probes
>>
>> Its probably been covered, but what where your indications of a
>> probe failure? Ive got one on the fritz reading a constant v ery
>> low temp but I dont know if its the wiring or the probe gone bad. I
>> also have the GRT setup and 450 hours TT.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>> <mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>
>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *DLM
>> *Sent:* Sunday, May 16, 2010 5:50 PM
>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
>> *Subject:* RV10-List: EGT probes
>>
>>
>> Any suggestions for long life EGT probes? I have 278 TT on my RV10
>> and have replaced 3 EGT probes from GRT. Failures have been on 6
>> then 4 (or 2) then 1. #2 failed this morning. Some are the original
>> GRT EIS probes and some are their allegedly long life probes. I lost
>> the third one on a trip to IL and GRT FEDEXed two "long life" probes
>> to IL. I changed #1 and kept the spare. This morning on a local
>> training flight, #2 failed (again?). Probes are located 2 inches
>> below the exhaust port (specs call 2-6"). EGTs normally see high
>> 1300 /low 1400 in cruise. takeoff and climb EGTs are 1200-1350. At
>> altitude the LOP operation usually provided CHTs (275-325) and EGTs
>> (1360-1410). GEM probes on a previous aircraft (TC177RG) were rated
>> for 1650 F red line and since my normal operation was about EGTs at
>> 1400. I replaced two probes in 29 years of ownership and 2500
>> hours. I have now replaced 4 GRT probes in 278 hours. I am
>> considering a completely new set of Alcor or GEM probes
>>
>> * *
>>
>> * *
>>
>> - The RV10-List Email Forum utilities such as List
>> Photoshare, and much much -->
>> http://www.matronic================
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
>>
>> - content also available via the Web -->
>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>http://forums.matronics.comstyle='mso-spacerun:yes'
>> > - List Contribution Web Site style='mso-
>> spacerun:yes'> Thank you
>> for your generous
>> style='mso-spacerun:yes'> -Matt
>> style='mso-spacerun:yes'> --> http://www.matronics.com/c
>> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>>
>> * * <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>>
>> *
>>
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List*
>> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>> *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 |
|
Cool. I'll look into both then. My old plane had EI probes and they
were plenty fast and accurate too. If they both work great, I'd
gladly pay more for ones that will last a long time. At least these
gave me >25% of TBO. At 50% I probably wouldn't blink.
Tim
On Jun 7, 2010, at 10:35 AM, "DLM" <dlm46007@cox.net> wrote:
>
> The probes are the same size as the GRT; that is why a chose them ;
> i would not need to redrill the holes.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 8:09 AM
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: EGT probes
>
>
>
> I'm not sure if I'd want to go smaller if they're much smaller in
> diameter though.....additional exhaust leakage could erode the hole,
> at least unless you can get a tight seal even though they're
> skinnier. My original GRT probes were plenty fast in response for
> me....but that does bring up the issue of I need to also find out if
> the "better" GRT probes are the same diameter an response. The old
> probes served me real well except I'd have hoped for 1,000 hours or so
> on the lifetime. Not sure what's practical....I've never flown a
> plane over 625 hours before, so I don't know what expected lifetime
> is.
> Tim
>
>
> On Jun 7, 2010, at 9:14 AM, "DLM" <dlm46007@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> The GRT probes $45 and $36; The EI probes were $70; total was $433
>> including shipping. These ae the fine point probes and are the
>> small diameter probes; the list for $104. I called and talked to
>> Matt at EI. These are fast response P-110.
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@myrv10.com>
>> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 6:22 AM
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: EGT probes
>>
>>
>>
>> Following up on this....
>>
>> This weekend I had my first real hard EGT probe failure. It went
>> from working fine to reading 70-90 degrees, while all other
>> engine parameters and temps were normal. So it looks like I
>> finally failed an EGT probe from wear/burnout. I'm at
>> just over 625 hours, on the black type GRT probes. Now that
>> I had one go, I'll probably just replace the whole set of 6,
>> and keep the other 5 for spares or swap-in testing/troubleshooting.
>>
>> Out of curiosity David, what did you find for the difference
>> in price between the EI probes, and the GRT white colored
>> better quality probes?
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
>> do not archive
>>
>>
>> DLM wrote:
>>> I talked to Sandy and the very low reading indicates it is open
>>> and reading the temp of the internal EIS. My number two was like
>>> that and when removed was burn off to 3/8" I sent the list a
>>> picture recently. I am going to buy a set of EI quick response
>>> probes. I have been assured that they will work in place of the
>>> GRT probes (we will see). Got a good quote.
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> *From:* Marcus Cooper <mailto:coop85@verizon.net>
>>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, May 16, 2010 3:56 PM
>>> *Subject:* RE: RV10-List: EGT probes
>>>
>>> Its probably been covered, but what where your indications of a
>>> probe failure? Ive got one on the fritz reading a constant v
>>> ery
>>> low temp but I dont know if its the wiring or the probe gon
>>> e bad. I also have the GRT setup and 450 hours TT.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>>> <mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>
>>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *DLM
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, May 16, 2010 5:50 PM
>>> *To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
>>> *Subject:* RV10-List: EGT probes
>>>
>>>
>>> Any suggestions for long life EGT probes? I have 278 TT on my RV10
>>> and have replaced 3 EGT probes from GRT. Failures have been on 6
>>> then 4 (or 2) then 1. #2 failed this morning. Some are the
>>> original
>>> GRT EIS probes and some are their allegedly long life probes. I
>>> lost
>>> the third one on a trip to IL and GRT FEDEXed two "long life"
>>> probes
>>> to IL. I changed #1 and kept the spare. This morning on a local
>>> training flight, #2 failed (again?). Probes are located 2 inches
>>> below the exhaust port (specs call 2-6"). EGTs normally see high
>>> 1300 /low 1400 in cruise. takeoff and climb EGTs are 1200-1350. At
>>> altitude the LOP operation usually provided CHTs (275-325) and
>>> EGTs
>>> (1360-1410). GEM probes on a previous aircraft (TC177RG) were
>>> rated
>>> for 1650 F red line and since my normal operation was about
>>> EGTs at
>>> 1400. I replaced two probes in 29 years of ownership and 2500
>>> hours. I have now replaced 4 GRT probes in 278 hours. I am
>>> considering a completely new set of Alcor or GEM probes
>>>
>>> * *
>>>
>>> * *
>>>
>>> - The RV10-List Email Forum utilities such as List
>>> Photoshare, and much much -->
>>> http://www.matronic================
>>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>
>>>
>>> - content also available via the Web -->
>>> <http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List>http://forums.matronics.comstyle='mso-spacerun:yes'
>>> > - List Contribution Web Site style='mso-
>>> spacerun:yes'> Thank you
>>> for your generous
>>> style='mso-spacerun:yes'> -Matt
>>> style='mso-spacerun:yes'> --> http://www.matronics.com/c
>>> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>>>
>>> * * <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List*
>>> <http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
>>> *href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>> *
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner. |
I think that people are a little more worked up than they
should be. First, a common complaint is that they still
need a transponder. I don't think you'd want to operate
SOLELY on GPS based positioning. GPS isn't 100% reliable,
which is also why at least a certain number of VOR's should
always be kept operational. Also, due to some of the
solar activity and changes we're experiencing and expected
to experience in the next 0-20 years, I don't know that
we'd want to rely on GPS as a sole means, even from that
perspective. So if they want it to be a new SOLE means of
position identification, they should develop it on a
much more foolproof base technology than GPS. Given that,
I think it's reasonable to have a Transponder required
for certain controlled airspace, and also have ADS-B
required.
As far as ADS-B "IN" being mandated, I'm really not
interested in anything being mandated to be used for
IN. Why would you? Don't mandate that someone HAS
to have a MFD or PFD capable of displaying the info.
The benefits already exist for those who equip, to have
the data. I mean, if they give you traffic for free
after hardware purchase, you'd be crazy not to use it,
unless you own active traffic...in which case why
should anyone mandate "IN" for you? Weather? Well,
I personally don't forsee going to FIS-B weather. The
coverage simply will NEVER be as good as WSI weather
is giving me now. I want coverage on the ground,
BEFORE I depart, from any airport, or even (and
especially), if I for some reason am scud running
somewhere (and by that I'm not talking the nasty
viz scud running...but a more reasonable amount of
viz).
They're right that this does shift some of the costs
to the end user, instead of the FAA, but, in the end,
all users who participate will be able to benefit if
in no other way than traffic alerts, as long as they
get some minimal equipment. I think they're also
using the FUD and some unreasonably inflated costs
as part of their information war against anything that
increases our costs. For instance, they keep quoting
$8,000 for a cost per plane. That may be true for
some systems, but just as their ADS-B isn't 100% online
in the U.S. right now, there are systems that are spooled
up ready to be deployed for far less cost than that.
Some for $2400-2600, for instance. They also want to
make it sound like you should wait....but waiting
unnecessarily is only going to mean that the system
as a whole has delayed benefit. It's true that waiting
will probably give you more options, but if you're
flying today and could benefit, it would seem that
waiting is only going to delay some benefit for YOU, too.
If there is something to bitch about with the direction
though, it's a couple of things....
First, they didn't need to cut off UAT as legal option
above 18,000'. So now, our RV-10 flying with ADS-B
and only UAT, would be limited to 18,000' after the deadline.
To me, this doesn't affect me at all, because I find no
benefit in our RV-10 to going that high. But to some
turbocharged fliers it will affect them. They'll
need 1090ES to go there.
Next, they shouldn't have to have any ultra special
requirement for the GPS side of things. We're not talking
about something that needs better than 100' accuracy
here. If you're separating traffic, 100' accuracy should
be plenty, in both altitude and laterally. To me, it
seems that certain large avionics manufacturers probably
lobbied a bit to get the FAA to write the rule so that
it would ensure that they could keep selling THEIR systems.
In the end, I think we'll find though that if they
don't price their system right, it won't sell...and
they'll probably have more competition in the ADS-B
arena than they did in the Transponder category.
One other thing...I see people talk about how the traffic
and weather won't be FREE in the future...or might not be.
Well, given the way the communications protocols are
written and how it started to be implemented, I don't
think we'll see any way for them to NOT make traffic
a free service. Probably not weather, either. The thing
is, they'd have to implement some sort of code based
technology that prevents unauthorized users from using it.
That isn't in there right now, and it's already being
deployed. They certainly aren't likely to be this far
into the game and then do a massive rewrite. ADS-B is
actually many years old already....and making a change
of that magnitude would set everyone back to zero.
So I expect traffic will be free forever...and likely
a certain amount of weather info too. They damn well
better keep TFR info free, because that should
be free for in-cockpit for anyone in this day and age.
So I watch these silly news posts and grumblings
and get a laugh out of them. Lots of people blowing
hot air and making noise about something that isn't that
big of an issue.....especially not for someone building
an RV-10, as our planes were designed to fly in ways
that use the Airspace system....not go low and slow
over the trees on a beautiful sunny afternoon.
Those people won't need to equip with either technology
now, or in the future....but we would still benefit
if they did.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
Perry, Phil wrote:
> Im not sure if any of you saw this, but I found it on the EAAs site
> this morning. Its worth reading.
>
> Full Article
>
> http://www.eaa.org/news/2010/2010-06-03_ads-b.asp
>
>
>
>
>
> ---Snip---Snip---
>
> EAA has long favored a satellite-based tracking system, provided that it
> would benefit aircraft operators as well as the national airspace
> system. _Unfortunately, FAA has only mandated whats called ADS-B (out),
> which sends tracking information to the air traffic system._
>
> _EAA has long held that the benefit to pilots would be from systems that
> allow us to receive traffic, weather, and safety information in the
> cockpit (ADS-B in)._ Without that element, the new mandate directly
> serves only FAA air traffic control.
>
> */_What this new rule does is shift the cost of aircraft tracking from
> the governments mammoth ground-based radar systems to the cockpit and
> the individual pilot,_/* said Doug Macnair, EAAs vice president of
> government relations. It makes sense to migrate to new satellite-based
> technology based on ADS-B, which would replace existing transponders and
> encoders. But if the aircraft owner has to pay for it, pilots should
> also receive substantial safety and operational benefits.
>
> ---Snip---Snip---
>
>
>
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Comm Antennas |
I don't think the last suggestion will work. The usual passive splitter (diplexer?)
will allow half the transmitter power to go directly into the second com
radio--not good. Also these matched splitters may or may not handle thepower.
If you put an active switch for the diplexer then you won't be able to hear on
both radios simultaneously.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=300363#300363
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 |
|
Just as a baseline:
We had the original GEM (slow) probes in a 182 and after 1500+ hours no probes
had yet failed. However, I think "fast" probes are thinner and will give less
service life than "slow" probes.
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=300365#300365
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner. |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Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RV-10 losses against the finite pool of insured's |
A few of us were Hangar talking on a soggy dark day a little while ago
about what is now the 4 total loss of a finished RV-10s against the
fleet of over 300 successful ones. Now owners are beginning to pay
increasing premiums to cover those losses. It is some Real Money
charges passed back onto the remaining pool with a dwindling number of
companies wanting to insure us. After the resent loss of an Alternate
Engine RV-10 in Georgia, it was mentioned that 50% of those losses were
these (an alarming percentage of the Alternate RV-10 Fleet) and a
question raised at what might be a short list of some of the various
conditions to look for. There is seldom a simple answer and always lots
of discussion which can be a good thing or frustrating. I don't think
it's the Alternate Engine choice.
As an EAA Tech Advisor, occasionally I am asked about Vans coiled
aluminum lines, B nuts, ferrules and the like. Also I am asked as to
the merits and costs of Bonaco pre-fabricated products. Attached
herewith is an excellent post on hydraulic lines, It just as easily
could have been "Fuel" lines on one of our RV-10s. (Note: The PDF
attachment is 290K for our bandwidth restricted brethren). Too often,
the builders of Experimental Built/Amateur maintained aircraft are yet
to get up to speed on the latest fabrication techniques, effective
flushing of an installed system and proper torqueing of B nuts. Much is
the result of poor preparation and brutal torqueing forces by operators.
Kinks, chafes, constrictions , FOD and distorted mating surfaces came to
light. Quality Control and a second set of eyes can certain not hurt.
I doubt we will ever hear that such a boring subject actually
contributed to the loss of the most recent RV-10. Hopefully a few
builders out there may find value in a road traveled by an earlier
builder with fabricated lines. The pictures drive home what we are
looking for in a successful Tech inspection. Some value may be applied
to future RV-10 operations.
Just fanning the fumes of controversy before packing up for the
pilgrimage to OSH. Our prayers remain which those who travel before us
and contribute to the pool of our aviation experiences. <<Anatomy of a
Hydraulic LeakR3.pdf>>
John Cox
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner. |
I am buying the gtx330es and the gts800. This setup will allow both
out and in to complete the ads-b loop.
It is really too expensive but I figure it will be a little more in
the transponder that I am buying anyway. The gts800 is what I want
because I am a big wuss and it is one of the few active TCAS systems
that interrogate and also has ads-b in.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 7, 2010, at 11:28, "Perry, Phil" <Phil.Perry@netapp.com> wrote:
> I don't really care what method is used for navigation. All forms
> have their own shortcomings.
>
> But the idea of ADS-B (in) not being included in the mandate what's
> concerning. This means we could install (in) devices in the
> aircraft but the government has no requirement to broadcast such
> information.
>
> They need to mandate the broadcast of all ADS-B data, otherwise its
> money we're spending for no benefit. They're trying to keep their
> self off the hook by creatively working around mandates.
>
> Phil
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com>
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Mon Jun 07 10:03:23 2010
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner.
>
>
> I think that people are a little more worked up than they
> should be. First, a common complaint is that they still
> need a transponder. I don't think you'd want to operate
> SOLELY on GPS based positioning. GPS isn't 100% reliable,
> which is also why at least a certain number of VOR's should
> always be kept operational. Also, due to some of the
> solar activity and changes we're experiencing and expected
> to experience in the next 0-20 years, I don't know that
> we'd want to rely on GPS as a sole means, even from that
> perspective. So if they want it to be a new SOLE means of
> position identification, they should develop it on a
> much more foolproof base technology than GPS. Given that,
> I think it's reasonable to have a Transponder required
> for certain controlled airspace, and also have ADS-B
> required.
>
> As far as ADS-B "IN" being mandated, I'm really not
> interested in anything being mandated to be used for
> IN. Why would you? Don't mandate that someone HAS
> to have a MFD or PFD capable of displaying the info.
> The benefits already exist for those who equip, to have
> the data. I mean, if they give you traffic for free
> after hardware purchase, you'd be crazy not to use it,
> unless you own active traffic...in which case why
> should anyone mandate "IN" for you? Weather? Well,
> I personally don't forsee going to FIS-B weather. The
> coverage simply will NEVER be as good as WSI weather
> is giving me now. I want coverage on the ground,
> BEFORE I depart, from any airport, or even (and
> especially), if I for some reason am scud running
> somewhere (and by that I'm not talking the nasty
> viz scud running...but a more reasonable amount of
> viz).
>
> They're right that this does shift some of the costs
> to the end user, instead of the FAA, but, in the end,
> all users who participate will be able to benefit if
> in no other way than traffic alerts, as long as they
> get some minimal equipment. I think they're also
> using the FUD and some unreasonably inflated costs
> as part of their information war against anything that
> increases our costs. For instance, they keep quoting
> $8,000 for a cost per plane. That may be true for
> some systems, but just as their ADS-B isn't 100% online
> in the U.S. right now, there are systems that are spooled
> up ready to be deployed for far less cost than that.
> Some for $2400-2600, for instance. They also want to
> make it sound like you should wait....but waiting
> unnecessarily is only going to mean that the system
> as a whole has delayed benefit. It's true that waiting
> will probably give you more options, but if you're
> flying today and could benefit, it would seem that
> waiting is only going to delay some benefit for YOU, too.
>
> If there is something to bitch about with the direction
> though, it's a couple of things....
>
> First, they didn't need to cut off UAT as legal option
> above 18,000'. So now, our RV-10 flying with ADS-B
> and only UAT, would be limited to 18,000' after the deadline.
> To me, this doesn't affect me at all, because I find no
> benefit in our RV-10 to going that high. But to some
> turbocharged fliers it will affect them. They'll
> need 1090ES to go there.
>
> Next, they shouldn't have to have any ultra special
> requirement for the GPS side of things. We're not talking
> about something that needs better than 100' accuracy
> here. If you're separating traffic, 100' accuracy should
> be plenty, in both altitude and laterally. To me, it
> seems that certain large avionics manufacturers probably
> lobbied a bit to get the FAA to write the rule so that
> it would ensure that they could keep selling THEIR systems.
> In the end, I think we'll find though that if they
> don't price their system right, it won't sell...and
> they'll probably have more competition in the ADS-B
> arena than they did in the Transponder category.
>
> One other thing...I see people talk about how the traffic
> and weather won't be FREE in the future...or might not be.
> Well, given the way the communications protocols are
> written and how it started to be implemented, I don't
> think we'll see any way for them to NOT make traffic
> a free service. Probably not weather, either. The thing
> is, they'd have to implement some sort of code based
> technology that prevents unauthorized users from using it.
> That isn't in there right now, and it's already being
> deployed. They certainly aren't likely to be this far
> into the game and then do a massive rewrite. ADS-B is
> actually many years old already....and making a change
> of that magnitude would set everyone back to zero.
> So I expect traffic will be free forever...and likely
> a certain amount of weather info too. They damn well
> better keep TFR info free, because that should
> be free for in-cockpit for anyone in this day and age.
>
> So I watch these silly news posts and grumblings
> and get a laugh out of them. Lots of people blowing
> hot air and making noise about something that isn't that
> big of an issue.....especially not for someone building
> an RV-10, as our planes were designed to fly in ways
> that use the Airspace system....not go low and slow
> over the trees on a beautiful sunny afternoon.
> Those people won't need to equip with either technology
> now, or in the future....but we would still benefit
> if they did.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
> do not archive
>
>
> Perry, Phil wrote:
> > I=9A=C3=84=C3=B4m not sure if any of you saw this, but I found
it on the EAA
> =9A=C3=84=C3=B4s site
> > this morning. It=9A=C3=84=C3=B4s worth reading.
> >
> > Full Article=9A=C3=84=C2=B6=9A=C3=84=C2=B6
> >
> > http://www.eaa.org/news/2010/2010-06-03_ads-b.asp
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---Snip---Snip---
> >
> > EAA has long favored a satellite-based tracking system, provided
> that it
> > would benefit aircraft operators as well as the national airspace
> > system. _Unfortunately, FAA has only mandated what=9A=C3=84=C3=B4
s called
> ADS-B (out),
> > which sends tracking information to the air traffic system._
> >
> > _EAA has long held that the benefit to pilots would be from
> systems that
> > allow us to receive traffic, weather, and safety information in the
> > cockpit (ADS-B in)._ Without that element, the new mandate directly
> > serves only FAA air traffic control.
> >
> > */_=9A=C3=84=C3=BAWhat this new rule does is shift the cost of
aircraft
> tracking from
> > the government=9A=C3=84=C3=B4s mammoth ground-based radar
systems to the
> cockpit and
> > the individual pilot,=9A=C3=84=C3=B9_/* said Doug Macnair,
EAA=9A=C3=84=C3=B4s vice
> president of
> > government relations. =9A=C3=84=C3=BAIt makes sense to migrate
to new
> satellite-based
> > technology based on ADS-B, which would replace existing
> transponders and
> > encoders. But if the aircraft owner has to pay for it, pilots should
> > also receive substantial safety and operational benefits.=9A=C3=84
=C3=B9
> >
> > ---Snip---Snip---
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *
> >
> >
> > *
>
>
> =C2=B6=88=91=C3=B5~=C3=A2=C3=8C=89=A4,=EF=AC=81=C5=B8
%=C2=A2=CE=A94=9DM4}=C3=9F=1Er=C3=A3=C2=B4=C3=A2=C3=8D=C3=81{=07(
=88=AB=88=8F=C3=BB
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Weld-On 10 for Sale |
I've got 4 Weld-On 10 kits that I'm not going to use, Manufactured
July 1, 2009. $20 for the 4 plus shipping to anyone who wants them.
Please e-mail me offline.
Jeff Carpenter
40304
Do not archive.
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: | Brother's keepers |
In light of John's post about some losses and insurance rates, I have decided to
express some thoughts that I have been having for a while.
I just got involved in this community right about the time of the tragic accident
of a builder who crashed and died in his RV-10. What seemed odd to me as a
new member of the fraternity was all of the retrospective thoughts by those who
knew the guy well about red flags that they had seen during his building and
flying process. Apparently the guy was popular and well liked and people didn't
step forward when they saw things that concerned them.
I thought about that again when I recently read about a guy who launched his first
flight (successfully) without a functioning generator. I can see how any
of us, myself included, can get all wrapped up in the first flight hoopla, that
we take a chance on something that we wouldn't have otherwise done.
None of us are wiser than any other. The lowliest student pilot can catch something
that the most experienced ATP can miss. It doesn't do any good however,
if nobody speaks up out of fear of offending someone.
Every crash is not only tragic, but it costs each and every one of us dearly out
of our own pocketbooks either directly or indirectly. Immediately or down the
road we are each eventually going to pay for every accident.
As a community, we need to hunker down and police ourselves. We need to comment
forcefully on red flags, unwise practices, and the like, and foster more vigilance
and commitment to building and flying in the safest manner possible.
Friends don't let friends push the envelope. I need and request everyone's help
to keep from doing something stupid. The safety of the RV-10 community is in
our hands until things deteriorate to the point that unwanted hands step in
with onerous regulation and/or prohibitive cost.
--------
Myron Nelson
Mesa, AZ
Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse in progress
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=300389#300389
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner. |
Other than the cost, I think you'll have it made. In a
perfect world I'd do the bare bones cheapest OUT that
I could do, and have active traffic too. But, active
traffic itself for the real-deal integrated systems
is just too expensive. If it were $4000, I'd buy it
in a heartbeat, as long as i don't have to put those
ugly double-sharkblade antennas on.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
Seano wrote:
> I am buying the gtx330es and the gts800. This setup will allow both out
> and in to complete the ads-b loop.
>
> It is really too expensive but I figure it will be a little more in the
> transponder that I am buying anyway. The gts800 is what I want because I
> am a big wuss and it is one of the few active TCAS systems that
> interrogate and also has ads-b in.
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 7, 2010, at 11:28, "Perry, Phil" <Phil.Perry@netapp.com
> <mailto:Phil.Perry@netapp.com>> wrote:
>
>> I don't really care what method is used for navigation. All forms
>> have their own shortcomings.
>>
>> But the idea of ADS-B (in) not being included in the mandate what's
>> concerning. This means we could install (in) devices in the aircraft
>> but the government has no requirement to broadcast such information.
>>
>> They need to mandate the broadcast of all ADS-B data, otherwise its
>> money we're spending for no benefit. They're trying to keep their self
>> off the hook by creatively working around mandates.
>>
>> Phil
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com <mailto:Tim@myrv10.com>>
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> <rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>>
>> Sent: Mon Jun 07 10:03:23 2010
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner.
>>
>> <mailto:Tim@myrv10.com>>
>>
>> I think that people are a little more worked up than they
>> should be. First, a common complaint is that they still
>> need a transponder. I don't think you'd want to operate
>> SOLELY on GPS based positioning. GPS isn't 100% reliable,
>> which is also why at least a certain number of VOR's should
>> always be kept operational. Also, due to some of the
>> solar activity and changes we're experiencing and expected
>> to experience in the next 0-20 years, I don't know that
>> we'd want to rely on GPS as a sole means, even from that
>> perspective. So if they want it to be a new SOLE means of
>> position identification, they should develop it on a
>> much more foolproof base technology than GPS. Given that,
>> I think it's reasonable to have a Transponder required
>> for certain controlled airspace, and also have ADS-B
>> required.
>>
>> As far as ADS-B "IN" being mandated, I'm really not
>> interested in anything being mandated to be used for
>> IN. Why would you? Don't mandate that someone HAS
>> to have a MFD or PFD capable of displaying the info.
>> The benefits already exist for those who equip, to have
>> the data. I mean, if they give you traffic for free
>> after hardware purchase, you'd be crazy not to use it,
>> unless you own active traffic...in which case why
>> should anyone mandate "IN" for you? Weather? Well,
>> I personally don't forsee going to FIS-B weather. The
>> coverage simply will NEVER be as good as WSI weather
>> is giving me now. I want coverage on the ground,
>> BEFORE I depart, from any airport, or even (and
>> especially), if I for some reason am scud running
>> somewhere (and by that I'm not talking the nasty
>> viz scud running...but a more reasonable amount of
>> viz).
>>
>> They're right that this does shift some of the costs
>> to the end user, instead of the FAA, but, in the end,
>> all users who participate will be able to benefit if
>> in no other way than traffic alerts, as long as they
>> get some minimal equipment. I think they're also
>> using the FUD and some unreasonably inflated costs
>> as part of their information war against anything that
>> increases our costs. For instance, they keep quoting
>> $8,000 for a cost per plane. That may be true for
>> some systems, but just as their ADS-B isn't 100% online
>> in the U.S. right now, there are systems that are spooled
>> up ready to be deployed for far less cost than that.
>> Some for $2400-2600, for instance. They also want to
>> make it sound like you should wait....but waiting
>> unnecessarily is only going to mean that the system
>> as a whole has delayed benefit. It's true that waiting
>> will probably give you more options, but if you're
>> flying today and could benefit, it would seem that
>> waiting is only going to delay some benefit for YOU, too.
>>
>> If there is something to bitch about with the direction
>> though, it's a couple of things....
>>
>> First, they didn't need to cut off UAT as legal option
>> above 18,000'. So now, our RV-10 flying with ADS-B
>> and only UAT, would be limited to 18,000' after the deadline.
>> To me, this doesn't affect me at all, because I find no
>> benefit in our RV-10 to going that high. But to some
>> turbocharged fliers it will affect them. They'll
>> need 1090ES to go there.
>>
>> Next, they shouldn't have to have any ultra special
>> requirement for the GPS side of things. We're not talking
>> about something that needs better than 100' accuracy
>> here. If you're separating traffic, 100' accuracy should
>> be plenty, in both altitude and laterally. To me, it
>> seems that certain large avionics manufacturers probably
>> lobbied a bit to get the FAA to write the rule so that
>> it would ensure that they could keep selling THEIR systems.
>> In the end, I think we'll find though that if they
>> don't price their system right, it won't sell...and
>> they'll probably have more competition in the ADS-B
>> arena than they did in the Transponder category.
>>
>> One other thing...I see people talk about how the traffic
>> and weather won't be FREE in the future...or might not be.
>> Well, given the way the communications protocols are
>> written and how it started to be implemented, I don't
>> think we'll see any way for them to NOT make traffic
>> a free service. Probably not weather, either. The thing
>> is, they'd have to implement some sort of code based
>> technology that prevents unauthorized users from using it.
>> That isn't in there right now, and it's already being
>> deployed. They certainly aren't likely to be this far
>> into the game and then do a massive rewrite. ADS-B is
>> actually many years old already....and making a change
>> of that magnitude would set everyone back to zero.
>> So I expect traffic will be free forever...and likely
>> a certain amount of weather info too. They damn well
>> better keep TFR info free, because that should
>> be free for in-cockpit for anyone in this day and age.
>>
>> So I watch these silly news posts and grumblings
>> and get a laugh out of them. Lots of people blowing
>> hot air and making noise about something that isn't that
>> big of an issue.....especially not for someone building
>> an RV-10, as our planes were designed to fly in ways
>> that use the Airspace system....not go low and slow
>> over the trees on a beautiful sunny afternoon.
>> Those people won't need to equip with either technology
>> now, or in the future....but we would still benefit
>> if they did.
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
>> do not archive
>>
>>
>> Perry, Phil wrote:
>> > Im not sure if any of you saw this, but I found it on the EAAs
>> site
>> > this morning. Its worth reading.
>> >
>> > Full Article
>> >
>> >
>> <http://www.eaa.org/news/2010/2010-06-03_ads-b.asp>http://www.eaa.org/news/2010/2010-06-03_ads-b.asp
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---Snip---Snip---
>> >
>> > EAA has long favored a satellite-based tracking system, provided that it
>> > would benefit aircraft operators as well as the national airspace
>> > system. _Unfortunately, FAA has only mandated whats called ADS-B
>> (out),
>> > which sends tracking information to the air traffic system._
>> >
>> > _EAA has long held that the benefit to pilots would be from systems that
>> > allow us to receive traffic, weather, and safety information in the
>> > cockpit (ADS-B in)._ Without that element, the new mandate directly
>> > serves only FAA air traffic control.
>> >
>> > */_What this new rule does is shift the cost of aircraft tracking
>> from
>> > the governments mammoth ground-based radar systems to the cockpit and
>> > the individual pilot,_/* said Doug Macnair, EAAs vice president of
>> > government relations. It makes sense to migrate to new
>> satellite-based
>> > technology based on ADS-B, which would replace existing transponders and
>> > encoders. But if the aircraft owner has to pay for it, pilots should
>> > also receive substantial safety and operational benefits.
>> >
>> > ---Snip---Snip---
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > *
>> >
>> >
>> > *
>>
>>
>>
>> ==========
>> RV10-List Email Forum -
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> ==========
>> sp; - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==========
>> sp; - List Contribution Web Site -
>> sp; -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==========
>>
>>
>>
>> ?~?,fi %?4M4}r{
(??
> *
>
>
> *
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner. |
I know the ant. is ugee. I should buy the two antenna tcas which
would be two double shark fin and 8 coax plus every g3x antenna so
three gps antennas also 430w antenna and now add transponder, two
comms and two navs, what else? Oh ya elt.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 7, 2010, at 13:31, Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com> wrote:
>
> Other than the cost, I think you'll have it made. In a
> perfect world I'd do the bare bones cheapest OUT that
> I could do, and have active traffic too. But, active
> traffic itself for the real-deal integrated systems
> is just too expensive. If it were $4000, I'd buy it
> in a heartbeat, as long as i don't have to put those
> ugly double-sharkblade antennas on.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
> do not archive
>
>
> Seano wrote:
>> I am buying the gtx330es and the gts800. This setup will allow both
>> out and in to complete the ads-b loop. It is really too expensive
>> but I figure it will be a little more in the transponder that I am
>> buying anyway. The gts800 is what I want because I am a big wuss
>> and it is one of the few active TCAS systems that interrogate and
>> also has ads-b in. Sent from my iPhone
>> On Jun 7, 2010, at 11:28, "Perry, Phil" <Phil.Perry@netapp.com <mailto:Phil.Perry@netapp.com
>> >> wrote:
>>> I don't really care what method is used for navigation. All forms
>>> have their own shortcomings.
>>>
>>> But the idea of ADS-B (in) not being included in the mandate
>>> what's concerning. This means we could install (in) devices in
>>> the aircraft but the government has no requirement to broadcast
>>> such information.
>>>
>>> They need to mandate the broadcast of all ADS-B data, otherwise
>>> its money we're spending for no benefit. They're trying to keep
>>> their self off the hook by creatively working around mandates.
>>>
>>> Phil
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com <mailto:Tim@myrv10.com>>
>>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com> <rv10-list@matronics.com
>>> <mailto:rv10-list@matronics.com>>
>>> Sent: Mon Jun 07 10:03:23 2010
>>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: ADS-B: Transfering cost to the owner.
>>>
>>> >>
>>>
>>> I think that people are a little more worked up than they
>>> should be. First, a common complaint is that they still
>>> need a transponder. I don't think you'd want to operate
>>> SOLELY on GPS based positioning. GPS isn't 100% reliable,
>>> which is also why at least a certain number of VOR's should
>>> always be kept operational. Also, due to some of the
>>> solar activity and changes we're experiencing and expected
>>> to experience in the next 0-20 years, I don't know that
>>> we'd want to rely on GPS as a sole means, even from that
>>> perspective. So if they want it to be a new SOLE means of
>>> position identification, they should develop it on a
>>> much more foolproof base technology than GPS. Given that,
>>> I think it's reasonable to have a Transponder required
>>> for certain controlled airspace, and also have ADS-B
>>> required.
>>>
>>> As far as ADS-B "IN" being mandated, I'm really not
>>> interested in anything being mandated to be used for
>>> IN. Why would you? Don't mandate that someone HAS
>>> to have a MFD or PFD capable of displaying the info.
>>> The benefits already exist for those who equip, to have
>>> the data. I mean, if they give you traffic for free
>>> after hardware purchase, you'd be crazy not to use it,
>>> unless you own active traffic...in which case why
>>> should anyone mandate "IN" for you? Weather? Well,
>>> I personally don't forsee going to FIS-B weather. The
>>> coverage simply will NEVER be as good as WSI weather
>>> is giving me now. I want coverage on the ground,
>>> BEFORE I depart, from any airport, or even (and
>>> especially), if I for some reason am scud running
>>> somewhere (and by that I'm not talking the nasty
>>> viz scud running...but a more reasonable amount of
>>> viz).
>>>
>>> They're right that this does shift some of the costs
>>> to the end user, instead of the FAA, but, in the end,
>>> all users who participate will be able to benefit if
>>> in no other way than traffic alerts, as long as they
>>> get some minimal equipment. I think they're also
>>> using the FUD and some unreasonably inflated costs
>>> as part of their information war against anything that
>>> increases our costs. For instance, they keep quoting
>>> $8,000 for a cost per plane. That may be true for
>>> some systems, but just as their ADS-B isn't 100% online
>>> in the U.S. right now, there are systems that are spooled
>>> up ready to be deployed for far less cost than that.
>>> Some for $2400-2600, for instance. They also want to
>>> make it sound like you should wait....but waiting
>>> unnecessarily is only going to mean that the system
>>> as a whole has delayed benefit. It's true that waiting
>>> will probably give you more options, but if you're
>>> flying today and could benefit, it would seem that
>>> waiting is only going to delay some benefit for YOU, too.
>>>
>>> If there is something to bitch about with the direction
>>> though, it's a couple of things....
>>>
>>> First, they didn't need to cut off UAT as legal option
>>> above 18,000'. So now, our RV-10 flying with ADS-B
>>> and only UAT, would be limited to 18,000' after the deadline.
>>> To me, this doesn't affect me at all, because I find no
>>> benefit in our RV-10 to going that high. But to some
>>> turbocharged fliers it will affect them. They'll
>>> need 1090ES to go there.
>>>
>>> Next, they shouldn't have to have any ultra special
>>> requirement for the GPS side of things. We're not talking
>>> about something that needs better than 100' accuracy
>>> here. If you're separating traffic, 100' accuracy should
>>> be plenty, in both altitude and laterally. To me, it
>>> seems that certain large avionics manufacturers probably
>>> lobbied a bit to get the FAA to write the rule so that
>>> it would ensure that they could keep selling THEIR systems.
>>> In the end, I think we'll find though that if they
>>> don't price their system right, it won't sell...and
>>> they'll probably have more competition in the ADS-B
>>> arena than they did in the Transponder category.
>>>
>>> One other thing...I see people talk about how the traffic
>>> and weather won't be FREE in the future...or might not be.
>>> Well, given the way the communications protocols are
>>> written and how it started to be implemented, I don't
>>> think we'll see any way for them to NOT make traffic
>>> a free service. Probably not weather, either. The thing
>>> is, they'd have to implement some sort of code based
>>> technology that prevents unauthorized users from using it.
>>> That isn't in there right now, and it's already being
>>> deployed. They certainly aren't likely to be this far
>>> into the game and then do a massive rewrite. ADS-B is
>>> actually many years old already....and making a change
>>> of that magnitude would set everyone back to zero.
>>> So I expect traffic will be free forever...and likely
>>> a certain amount of weather info too. They damn well
>>> better keep TFR info free, because that should
>>> be free for in-cockpit for anyone in this day and age.
>>>
>>> So I watch these silly news posts and grumblings
>>> and get a laugh out of them. Lots of people blowing
>>> hot air and making noise about something that isn't that
>>> big of an issue.....especially not for someone building
>>> an RV-10, as our planes were designed to fly in ways
>>> that use the Airspace system....not go low and slow
>>> over the trees on a beautiful sunny afternoon.
>>> Those people won't need to equip with either technology
>>> now, or in the future....but we would still benefit
>>> if they did.
>>>
>>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
>>> do not archive
>>>
>>>
>>> Perry, Phil wrote:
>>> > Im not sure if any of you saw this, but I found it on the E
>>> AAs site
>>> > this morning. Its worth reading.
>>> >
>>> > Full Article
>>> >
>>> > <http://www.eaa.org/news/2010/2010-06-03_ads-b.asp>http://www.eaa.org/news/2010/2010-06-03_ads-b.asp
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > ---Snip---Snip---
>>> >
>>> > EAA has long favored a satellite-based tracking system, provided
>>> that it
>>> > would benefit aircraft operators as well as the national airspace
>>> > system. _Unfortunately, FAA has only mandated whats called
>>> ADS-B (out),
>>> > which sends tracking information to the air traffic system._
>>> >
>>> > _EAA has long held that the benefit to pilots would be from
>>> systems that
>>> > allow us to receive traffic, weather, and safety information in
>>> the
>>> > cockpit (ADS-B in)._ Without that element, the new mandate
>>> directly
>>> > serves only FAA air traffic control.
>>> >
>>> > */_What this new rule does is shift the cost of aircraft tr
>>> acking from
>>> > the governments mammoth ground-based radar systems to the c
>>> ockpit and
>>> > the individual pilot,_/* said Doug Macnair, EAAs
>>> vice president of
>>> > government relations. It makes sense to migrate to new sate
>>> llite-based
>>> > technology based on ADS-B, which would replace existing
>>> transponders and
>>> > encoders. But if the aircraft owner has to pay for it, pilots
>>> should
>>> > also receive substantial safety and operational benefits.
>>> >
>>> > ---Snip---Snip---
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > *
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> RV10-List Email Forum -
>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> ==========
>>> sp; - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>> ==========
>>> sp; - List Contribution Web Site -
>>> sp; -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> ==========
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ?~?,fi %?4M4}r{
(??
>> *
>> *
>
>
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Brother's keepers |
Negative Ghost Rider.....Lots of us stepped in, i.e. Horse, water, shown water,
refused to drink. Lots of people attempted to guide Dan, even to the point of
not telling him any more info that may allegedly use to allow him to skirt the
processes.
---- woxofswa <woxof@aol.com> wrote:
>
> In light of John's post about some losses and insurance rates, I have decided
to express some thoughts that I have been having for a while.
>
> I just got involved in this community right about the time of the tragic accident
of a builder who crashed and died in his RV-10. What seemed odd to me as
a new member of the fraternity was all of the retrospective thoughts by those
who knew the guy well about red flags that they had seen during his building
and flying process. Apparently the guy was popular and well liked and people
didn't step forward when they saw things that concerned them.
>
> I thought about that again when I recently read about a guy who launched his
first flight (successfully) without a functioning generator. I can see how any
of us, myself included, can get all wrapped up in the first flight hoopla, that
we take a chance on something that we wouldn't have otherwise done.
>
> None of us are wiser than any other. The lowliest student pilot can catch something
that the most experienced ATP can miss. It doesn't do any good however,
if nobody speaks up out of fear of offending someone.
>
> Every crash is not only tragic, but it costs each and every one of us dearly
out of our own pocketbooks either directly or indirectly. Immediately or down
the road we are each eventually going to pay for every accident.
>
> As a community, we need to hunker down and police ourselves. We need to comment
forcefully on red flags, unwise practices, and the like, and foster more vigilance
and commitment to building and flying in the safest manner possible.
>
> Friends don't let friends push the envelope. I need and request everyone's help
to keep from doing something stupid. The safety of the RV-10 community is
in our hands until things deteriorate to the point that unwanted hands step in
with onerous regulation and/or prohibitive cost.
>
> --------
> Myron Nelson
> Mesa, AZ
> Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse in progress
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=300389#300389
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Brother's keepers |
I'll confirm Rick's statement.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com <owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com>
Sent: Mon Jun 07 14:02:30 2010
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Brother's keepers
Negative Ghost Rider.....Lots of us stepped in, i.e. Horse, water, shown water,
refused to drink. Lots of people attempted to guide Dan, even to the point of
not telling him any more info that may allegedly use to allow him to skirt the
processes.
---- woxofswa <woxof@aol.com> wrote:
>
> In light of John's post about some losses and insurance rates, I have decided
to express some thoughts that I have been having for a while.
>
> I just got involved in this community right about the time of the tragic accident
of a builder who crashed and died in his RV-10. What seemed odd to me as
a new member of the fraternity was all of the retrospective thoughts by those
who knew the guy well about red flags that they had seen during his building
and flying process. Apparently the guy was popular and well liked and people
didn't step forward when they saw things that concerned them.
>
> I thought about that again when I recently read about a guy who launched his
first flight (successfully) without a functioning generator. I can see how any
of us, myself included, can get all wrapped up in the first flight hoopla, that
we take a chance on something that we wouldn't have otherwise done.
>
> None of us are wiser than any other. The lowliest student pilot can catch something
that the most experienced ATP can miss. It doesn't do any good however,
if nobody speaks up out of fear of offending someone.
>
> Every crash is not only tragic, but it costs each and every one of us dearly
out of our own pocketbooks either directly or indirectly. Immediately or down
the road we are each eventually going to pay for every accident.
>
> As a community, we need to hunker down and police ourselves. We need to comment
forcefully on red flags, unwise practices, and the like, and foster more vigilance
and commitment to building and flying in the safest manner possible.
>
> Friends don't let friends push the envelope. I need and request everyone's help
to keep from doing something stupid. The safety of the RV-10 community is
in our hands until things deteriorate to the point that unwanted hands step in
with onerous regulation and/or prohibitive cost.
>
> --------
> Myron Nelson
> Mesa, AZ
> Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse in progress
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=300389#300389
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | RV-10 losses against the finite pool of insured's |
John=2C
Nice article. i've made a hard copy to keep in the basement to refer for to
rque values. I'm replacing the few aluminum lines I've already installed wi
th SS as I believe they are much better. I'm really "anal" about torquing a
nd then marking every nut and bolt installed. However=2C one brake line tha
t I had previously installed didn't even have a flare on it. How the heck d
id that happen??? Must have been those dang elves that work on my plane a
t night forgot to put a flare on. I'm gonna have words with them! Thanks ag
ain. Dan
Subject: RV10-List: RV-10 losses against the finite pool of insured's
From: johnwcox@pacificnw.com
RV-10 losses against the finite pool of insured's
A few of us were Hangar talking on a soggy dark day a little while ago abou
t what is now the 4 total loss of a finished RV-10s against the fleet of ov
er 300 successful ones. Now owners are beginning to pay increasing premium
s to cover those losses. It is some Real Money charges passed back onto th
e remaining pool with a dwindling number of companies wanting to insure us.
After the resent loss of an Alternate Engine RV-10 in Georgia=2C it was m
entioned that 50% of those losses were these (an alarming percentage of the
Alternate RV-10 Fleet) and a question raised at what might be a short list
of some of the various conditions to look for. There is seldom a simple a
nswer and always lots of discussion which can be a good thing or frustratin
g. I don't think it=92s the Alternate Engine choice.
As an EAA Tech Advisor=2C occasionally I am asked about Vans coiled alumin
um lines=2C B nuts=2C ferrules and the like. Also I am asked as to the me
rits and costs of Bonaco pre-fabricated products. Attached herewith is an
excellent post on hydraulic lines=2C It just as easily could have been "Fue
l" lines on one of our RV-10s. (Note: The PDF attachment is 290K for our b
andwidth restricted brethren). Too often=2C the builders of Experimental Bu
ilt/Amateur maintained aircraft are yet to get up to speed on the latest fa
brication techniques=2C effective flushing of an installed system and prope
r torqueing of B nuts. Much is the result of poor preparation and brutal t
orqueing forces by operators. Kinks=2C chafes=2C constrictions =2C FOD and
distorted mating surfaces came to light. Quality Control and a second set
of eyes can certain not hurt.
I doubt we will ever hear that such a boring subject actually contributed t
o the loss of the most recent RV-10. Hopefully a few builders out there ma
y find value in a road traveled by an earlier builder with fabricated lines
. The pictures drive home what we are looking for in a successful Tech ins
pection. Some value may be applied to future RV-10 operations.
Just fanning the fumes of controversy before packing up for the pilgrimage
to OSH. Our prayers remain which those who travel before us and contribute
to the pool of our aviation experiences. <<Anatomy of a Hydraulic LeakR3.
pdf>>
John Cox
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hot
mail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=P
ID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Brother's keepers |
>>Negative Ghost Rider
--------
Myron Nelson
Mesa, AZ
Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse in progress
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=300407#300407
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! --
|