Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:16 AM - Re: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling air (Konrad/Conny)
2. 02:09 AM - Re: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling air (Rodger Todd)
3. 04:47 AM - Re: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling air (Ralph E. Capen)
4. 04:56 AM - Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. (Ralph E. Capen)
5. 05:03 AM - New Garmin Radios Announced GTN 650 & 750 (Larry Rosen)
6. 07:06 AM - Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. (Tim Olson)
7. 07:13 AM - Re: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling air (Deems Davis)
8. 08:12 AM - Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. (DLM)
9. 08:12 AM - Re: RV-8 Insurance... (Bob Turner)
10. 08:47 AM - Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. (Tim Olson)
11. 09:06 AM - Re: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling air (Robin Marks)
12. 09:31 AM - Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. (Dave Saylor)
13. 10:25 AM - Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. (Rob Kochman)
14. 10:26 AM - MT Governor oil leak (Rob Kochman)
15. 10:52 AM - Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. (William Curtis)
16. 11:18 AM - Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. (Robin Marks)
17. 11:24 AM - Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. (Shannon Hicks)
18. 11:55 AM - Re: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling air (Neal George)
19. 12:02 PM - Re: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling air (Rhonda Bewley)
20. 01:26 PM - Re: Matco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement write-upMatco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement write-up (Pascal)
21. 05:20 PM - Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet............ (mmayfield)
22. 08:26 PM - Re: WingX 7 for iPad (nukeflyboy)
23. 08:32 PM - Re: QB Kit Primer (nukeflyboy)
24. 09:14 PM - Re: Re: RV-8 Insurance... (Kelly McMullen)
25. 09:35 PM - Re: Re: WingX 7 for iPad (Tim Olson)
26. 10:36 PM - Re: Re: WingX 7 for iPad (Robin Marks)
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: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling |
air
Dear Rodger,
I don't remember the original source, as it has been years since I
last thought about the subject matter.
The main thought is to create the proper pressure differential between
the "properly sealed" upper and lower cowling chambers to actually -
suck- a sufficient amount of cooling air through the cylinders...
notice that I didn't say -blow- through ;-) I would actually rig up a
measuring system to see what the actual pressure differential is in
various cowling-/cylinder locations before I would start hacking on
the fiberglass at either intake or exhaust locations. A somewhat
pilot adjustable cowl flap sure would be my choice of heat control
(i.e. exhaust suction control), depending on climb, cruise, or top
speed operation...
The Racers at Reno are a mighty fine example of how little air flow
one can get away with, if their cooling system is really maximized for
proper performance with a minimum of cooling drag. I know Sam James
in person, and he sure is one interesting guy to talk to. I am not an
engineer by any means, but I do listen to smarter people then I am, so
I can learn from them. If I were you, then I would have a long talk
with Sam to discuss all options to improve cooling, if need be... Like
I said earlier, I personally would experiment with it all first, as to
come up with some accurate data to know where the actual problem may
lie to begin with.
Just my two cents, Konrad
On Mar 23, 2011, at 11:21 PM, Rodger Todd wrote:
>
> Thanks Konrad,
>
> That was the information I was seeking. Incidentally, do you know
> the source?
>
> I too have the Sam James Cowl and plenum, in fact I was the second
> customer. It is therefore quite disturbing to hear that the intake
> area is probably too small. Increasing it to 6" will actually
> increase the airflow by a factor 5 (proportional to the 4th power of
> the radius). However my understanding is that the system works by
> having the intake very close to the propeller trailing edge and
> therefore having relatively high energy air entering the plenum.
> The expansion area of the plenum causes the air to slow down and
> hence be more available for efficient cooling whilst the intake
> provides the pressure that drives the flow. It's not a simple system
> and hence I was looking for an engineer's opinion.
>
> I received an update to the cowl some time ago and now I am getting
> ready to install it. It appears that the air outlet was too small
> and Sam sent me a new outlet to replace the original. This part
> will have to be glassed in and as I am also using a non standard
> exhaust system which is larger than the Vetterman I wanted to design
> the replacement outlet so that I only have one amendment to make to
> the cowl.
>
> I was aware of the LOP problem and was lucky enough to be able to
> see the solution (pressurised injectors) on Deems' aircraft last May.
>
> Many thanks to all,
>
> Rodger
>
> --- On Wed, 23/3/11, Konrad/Conny <klwerner@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> From: Konrad/Conny <klwerner@comcast.net>
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for
>> engine cooling air
>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>> Date: Wednesday, 23 March, 2011, 19:06
>> Konrad/Conny <klwerner@comcast.net>
>>
>> Dear Rodger,
>>
>> I has been a few years, but if I recall correctly, then the
>> factor is right around 1.5 (I think?) for the hot expanding
>> air to exhaust properly, when compared to the denser cold
>> air coming in.
>>
>> I agree with Ralph, as Sam James's cowling and plenum
>> systems are very efficient in that respect, by tightly
>> controlling the cooling airflow and not wasting any air
>> molecules for unnecessary drag.
>>
>> Konrad
>>
>>
>> On Mar 23, 2011, at 10:27 AM, Ralph E. Capen wrote:
>>
>> <recapen@earthlink.net>
>>>
>>> Considering the work that was done to develop the
>> SamJames cowl and plenum...and how well they work - I think
>> they're a great starting place.
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Rodger Todd <rj_todd@yahoo.co.uk>
>>>> Sent: Mar 23, 2011 7:42 AM
>>>> To: RV10-List@matronics.com
>>>> Subject: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet
>> areas for engine cooling air
>>>>
>> <rj_todd@yahoo.co.uk>
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Can any of the engineers out there please advise
>> whether there is an optimal ratio of the cowl inlet to
>> outlet areas for engine air cooling?
>>>>
>>>> Thanking you all in anticipation,
>>>>
>>>> Rodger
>>>> In Oz where cooling matters
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Forum -
>> FAQ,
>> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
>> List Contribution Web Site -
>> -Matt
>> Dralle, List Admin.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling |
air
Thanks Konrad for your sage advice; I may be able to go to Florida in August and
I will try to call on Sam.
THanks very much,
Rodger
PS Do I have stack space for a GTN750?
--- On Thu, 24/3/11, Konrad/Conny <klwerner@comcast.net> wrote:
> From: Konrad/Conny <klwerner@comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling
air
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Date: Thursday, 24 March, 2011, 8:11
> Konrad/Conny <klwerner@comcast.net>
>
> Dear Rodger,
>
> I don't remember the original source, as it has been years
> since I last thought about the subject matter.
>
> The main thought is to create the proper pressure
> differential between the "properly sealed" upper and lower
> cowling chambers to actually -suck- a sufficient amount of
> cooling air through the cylinders... notice that I didn't
> say -blow- through ;-) I would actually rig up a
> measuring system to see what the actual pressure
> differential is in various cowling-/cylinder locations
> before I would start hacking on the fiberglass at either
> intake or exhaust locations. A somewhat pilot
> adjustable cowl flap sure would be my choice of heat control
> (i.e. exhaust suction control), depending on climb,
> cruise, or top speed operation...
>
> The Racers at Reno are a mighty fine example of how little
> air flow one can get away with, if their cooling system is
> really maximized for proper performance with a minimum of
> cooling drag. I know Sam James in person, and he sure
> is one interesting guy to talk to. I am not an
> engineer by any means, but I do listen to smarter people
> then I am, so I can learn from them. If I were you,
> then I would have a long talk with Sam to discuss all
> options to improve cooling, if need be... Like I said
> earlier, I personally would experiment with it all first, as
> to come up with some accurate data to know where the actual
> problem may lie to begin with.
>
> Just my two cents, Konrad
>
>
> On Mar 23, 2011, at 11:21 PM, Rodger Todd wrote:
>
> >
> > Thanks Konrad,
> >
> > That was the information I was seeking.
> Incidentally, do you know the source?
> >
> > I too have the Sam James Cowl and plenum, in fact I
> was the second customer. It is therefore quite
> disturbing to hear that the intake area is probably too
> small. Increasing it to 6" will actually increase the
> airflow by a factor 5 (proportional to the 4th power of the
> radius). However my understanding is that the system
> works by having the intake very close to the propeller
> trailing edge and therefore having relatively high energy
> air entering the plenum. The expansion area of the
> plenum causes the air to slow down and hence be more
> available for efficient cooling whilst the intake provides
> the pressure that drives the flow. It's not a simple system
> and hence I was looking for an engineer's opinion.
> >
> > I received an update to the cowl some time ago and now
> I am getting ready to install it. It appears that the
> air outlet was too small and Sam sent me a new outlet to
> replace the original. This part will have to be
> glassed in and as I am also using a non standard exhaust
> system which is larger than the Vetterman I wanted to design
> the replacement outlet so that I only have one amendment to
> make to the cowl.
> >
> > I was aware of the LOP problem and was lucky enough to
> be able to see the solution (pressurised injectors) on
> Deems' aircraft last May.
> >
> > Many thanks to all,
> >
> > Rodger
> >
> > --- On Wed, 23/3/11, Konrad/Conny <klwerner@comcast.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Konrad/Conny <klwerner@comcast.net>
> >> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and
> outlet areas for engine cooling air
> >> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> >> Date: Wednesday, 23 March, 2011, 19:06
> >> Konrad/Conny <klwerner@comcast.net>
> >>
> >> Dear Rodger,
> >>
> >> I has been a few years, but if I recall correctly,
> then the
> >> factor is right around 1.5 (I think?) for the hot
> expanding
> >> air to exhaust properly, when compared to the
> denser cold
> >> air coming in.
> >>
> >> I agree with Ralph, as Sam James's cowling and
> plenum
> >> systems are very efficient in that respect, by
> tightly
> >> controlling the cooling airflow and not wasting
> any air
> >> molecules for unnecessary drag.
> >>
> >> Konrad
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mar 23, 2011, at 10:27 AM, Ralph E. Capen
> wrote:
> >>
> Capen"
> >> <recapen@earthlink.net>
> >>>
> >>> Considering the work that was done to develop
> the
> >> SamJames cowl and plenum...and how well they work
> - I think
> >> they're a great starting place.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Rodger Todd <rj_todd@yahoo.co.uk>
> >>>> Sent: Mar 23, 2011 7:42 AM
> >>>> To: RV10-List@matronics.com
> >>>> Subject: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake
> and outlet
> >> areas for engine cooling air
> >>>>
> Todd
> >> <rj_todd@yahoo.co.uk>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> Can any of the engineers out there please
> advise
> >> whether there is an optimal ratio of the cowl
> inlet to
> >> outlet areas for engine air cooling?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanking you all in anticipation,
> >>>>
> >>>> Rodger
> >>>> In Oz where cooling matters
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Forum -
> >> FAQ,
> >> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> >> List Contribution Web Site -
> >>
> -Matt
> >> Dralle, List Admin.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Forum -
> FAQ,
> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
> List Contribution Web Site -
> -Matt
> Dralle, List Admin.
>
>
>
>
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: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling |
air
Yup - I took an earlier post as an educational point - my experience is with my
6A - which I'm happy with.
Like I said before they should have done the same level of research and testing
on the -10 cowl......
Takin the heat - fessin I'm wrong....
-----Original Message-----
>From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
>Sent: Mar 23, 2011 4:57 PM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling
air
>
>
>As one who drank the Koolaid, I would beg to disagree, IMO the Sam James
>cowl intake area is WAY UNDERSIZED, I believe this has been
>substantiated by another -10 builder who did some considerable
>modifications to increase the size of the intake for the SJ cowl/plenum
>and saw improved cooling performance. If you think about it, it stands
>to reason, James uses the same size intake rings for the 6 cyl as he
>does for the 4 cyl ????? Yet there is considerable more area to cool an
>more heat generated. The cowls look sexy, but I cannot attribute ANY
>improvement to speed/performance. However, by way of comparison there is
>a Reduction in the cooling.
>
>Deems
>N519PJ
>
>On 3/23/2011 9:27 AM, Ralph E. Capen wrote:
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Ralph E. Capen"<recapen@earthlink.net>
>>
>> Considering the work that was done to develop the SamJames cowl and plenum...and
how well they work - I think they're a great starting place.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Rodger Todd<rj_todd@yahoo.co.uk>
>>> Sent: Mar 23, 2011 7:42 AM
>>> To: RV10-List@matronics.com
>>> Subject: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling
air
>>>
>>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Rodger Todd<rj_todd@yahoo.co.uk>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Can any of the engineers out there please advise whether there is an optimal
ratio of the cowl inlet to outlet areas for engine air cooling?
>>>
>>> Thanking you all in anticipation,
>>>
>>> Rodger
>>> In Oz where cooling matters
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. |
Finally - some competition to Garmin - maybe it will get a little bit more reasonable
now?!
-----Original Message-----
>From: Kelly McMullen <apilot2@gmail.com>
>Sent: Mar 24, 2011 12:26 AM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV10-List: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet..................
>
>
>Aero-News Net also reports that Honeywell/King has collaborated with
>Aspen Avionics and claims they will finally have their WAAS GPS 770
>before the end of this year.
>
>On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:50 PM, John Gonzalez <indigoonlatigo@msn.com> wrote:
>> So far the only thing I hate about Garmin is that they roll out new products
>> too fast making their othernew products obsolete way too soon.
>>
>> EEEHHHGGGG!
>>
>>> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:30:01 -0700
>>> Subject: RV10-List: For those that haven't bought their avionics
>>> yet..................
>>> From: apilot2@gmail.com
>>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>>>
>>>
>>> http://garmin.blogs.com/pr/2011/03====================
>>> _====
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: | New Garmin Radios Announced GTN 650 & 750 |
Garmin announce the successors to the GNS 430W and 530W.
<http://garmin.blogs.com/pr/2011/03/garmin-announces-the-future-of-avionics-.html>
Larry
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. |
I don't know, I'm not so sure that these boxes will be
functionally preferable in some ways to the stuff we have
right now.
First, the touchscreen functions will often, when you
really need them, be useless. I know they put finger
holding places so you can secure your hand, but I've
literally been flying on days when your outstretched
arm and hand can hardly be held up steady enough to hit
a button, even with fingers firmly on a bezel.
So features like rubberbanding to change flight plans
and things like that will be useless. Some of the soft
keys will be very hard at times to hit properly, and
with no hard space between buttons, it probably will
be easier to hit the wrong soft key. It is good that
they planned for some of that by adding finger hold
areas, and some critical functions to the very few knobs
that the system has, but personally I believe that
touchscreen has very limited use in a panel mount
environment....but has very extensive use in the
handheld environment, where the tablet/device can
move with your hand during bumps.
Then we get on to the other big thing that will make
some of the pretty pictures you see, less relevant to
your actual use.
The 650 looks like it could be a great replacement for
the 430/530. It would fit in fine. But, the 750 is
simply not going to fit well in many people's RV-10
panels. I talk to people all the time about their
panels, and how they want to add item Q, R, S, T U,
V, W, X, Y...and Z. Yeah, we all want tons of cool
stuff. Having a monster screen on your Nav/Com/GPS
is going to mean eliminating something else to make
it fit. Also, these 2 radios are NOT EFIS systems.
Garmin really did a good job with the G900/1000,
and G3X, of giving you attitude display and a pretty
good MFD all in the same screens. Here though
you're talking about just a Nav/Com/GPS that makes
a pretty good MFD, yet won't give you the reversionary
capabilities of a multi-screen EFIS like the G1000/G3X.
So the 750 is going to be a pretty hard fit in many
panels...at least in the experimental world where
I live. And, in the regular certified GA market
as an upgrade, it could require very significant
rework to fit into an existing stack.
So personally, I think that at least in the experimental
world, most people will still prefer an EFIS and
if they buy the new radios it would be the smaller 650,
but use a nice multi-screen system with MFD. I think
if they had included more of the standard function
buttons, it would be a better radio to use though, so
I think that for people with EFIS systems, this may
be a great opportunity to nab 430W's at a good price
for people who jump on a 650 based on looks alone,
without thinking of the things they'll miss by not
having buttons.
Just my 2 cents....it's pretty, but even Garmin itself
has better stuff for most people.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
On 3/23/2011 10:30 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen<apilot2@gmail.com>
>
> http://garmin.blogs.com/pr/2011/03/garmin-announces-the-future-of-avionics-.html#more
>
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: | Re: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling |
air
FYI
Even though everyone refers to them as the Sam James Cowls, Sam only
builds the Plenum, his son Will builds the Cowls, they are as different
as night and day to talk to. Will is extremely helpful over the phone.
Deems
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. |
Agreed. I was instructing in my 10 and although the student was flying the
aircraft, the "chop" was so bad it was difficult to input anything into the
Chelton buttons or soft keys.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 7:03 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: For those that haven't bought their avionics
yet..................
>
> I don't know, I'm not so sure that these boxes will be
> functionally preferable in some ways to the stuff we have
> right now.
>
> First, the touchscreen functions will often, when you
> really need them, be useless. I know they put finger
> holding places so you can secure your hand, but I've
> literally been flying on days when your outstretched
> arm and hand can hardly be held up steady enough to hit
> a button, even with fingers firmly on a bezel.
> So features like rubberbanding to change flight plans
> and things like that will be useless. Some of the soft
> keys will be very hard at times to hit properly, and
> with no hard space between buttons, it probably will
> be easier to hit the wrong soft key. It is good that
> they planned for some of that by adding finger hold
> areas, and some critical functions to the very few knobs
> that the system has, but personally I believe that
> touchscreen has very limited use in a panel mount
> environment....but has very extensive use in the
> handheld environment, where the tablet/device can
> move with your hand during bumps.
>
> Then we get on to the other big thing that will make
> some of the pretty pictures you see, less relevant to
> your actual use.
>
> The 650 looks like it could be a great replacement for
> the 430/530. It would fit in fine. But, the 750 is
> simply not going to fit well in many people's RV-10
> panels. I talk to people all the time about their
> panels, and how they want to add item Q, R, S, T U,
> V, W, X, Y...and Z. Yeah, we all want tons of cool
> stuff. Having a monster screen on your Nav/Com/GPS
> is going to mean eliminating something else to make
> it fit. Also, these 2 radios are NOT EFIS systems.
> Garmin really did a good job with the G900/1000,
> and G3X, of giving you attitude display and a pretty
> good MFD all in the same screens. Here though
> you're talking about just a Nav/Com/GPS that makes
> a pretty good MFD, yet won't give you the reversionary
> capabilities of a multi-screen EFIS like the G1000/G3X.
> So the 750 is going to be a pretty hard fit in many
> panels...at least in the experimental world where
> I live. And, in the regular certified GA market
> as an upgrade, it could require very significant
> rework to fit into an existing stack.
>
> So personally, I think that at least in the experimental
> world, most people will still prefer an EFIS and
> if they buy the new radios it would be the smaller 650,
> but use a nice multi-screen system with MFD. I think
> if they had included more of the standard function
> buttons, it would be a better radio to use though, so
> I think that for people with EFIS systems, this may
> be a great opportunity to nab 430W's at a good price
> for people who jump on a 650 based on looks alone,
> without thinking of the things they'll miss by not
> having buttons.
>
> Just my 2 cents....it's pretty, but even Garmin itself
> has better stuff for most people.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
> do not archive
>
>
> On 3/23/2011 10:30 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen<apilot2@gmail.com>
>>
>> http://garmin.blogs.com/pr/2011/03/garmin-announces-the-future-of-avionics-.html#more
>>
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV-8 Insurance... |
Matt,
You are correct. AIG and USAIG are different companies.
We had USAIG for many years on the 182 and they had a nice "plain language" policy
that you didn't have to be a lawyer to read.
Bob
--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=334912#334912
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. |
Exactly...and that system has knobs, nice separated
buttons, and a big bezel to rest on. I've had times
when it took multiple tries just to get frequencies
entered into my radios...and with touch-screen
for many features, I just don't know that in
some situations some functions will be able to be
done....although Garmin is trying to convince people
otherwise.
The OS though looks very nice, and if it weren't
panel mounted, I'd have to say it looks like it
was done with excellence.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
On 3/24/2011 9:44 AM, DLM wrote:
>
> Agreed. I was instructing in my 10 and although the student was flying
> the aircraft, the "chop" was so bad it was difficult to input anything
> into the Chelton buttons or soft keys.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 7:03 AM
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: For those that haven't bought their avionics
> yet..................
>
>
>>
>> I don't know, I'm not so sure that these boxes will be
>> functionally preferable in some ways to the stuff we have
>> right now.
>>
>> First, the touchscreen functions will often, when you
>> really need them, be useless. I know they put finger
>> holding places so you can secure your hand, but I've
>> literally been flying on days when your outstretched
>> arm and hand can hardly be held up steady enough to hit
>> a button, even with fingers firmly on a bezel.
>> So features like rubberbanding to change flight plans
>> and things like that will be useless. Some of the soft
>> keys will be very hard at times to hit properly, and
>> with no hard space between buttons, it probably will
>> be easier to hit the wrong soft key. It is good that
>> they planned for some of that by adding finger hold
>> areas, and some critical functions to the very few knobs
>> that the system has, but personally I believe that
>> touchscreen has very limited use in a panel mount
>> environment....but has very extensive use in the
>> handheld environment, where the tablet/device can
>> move with your hand during bumps.
>>
>> Then we get on to the other big thing that will make
>> some of the pretty pictures you see, less relevant to
>> your actual use.
>>
>> The 650 looks like it could be a great replacement for
>> the 430/530. It would fit in fine. But, the 750 is
>> simply not going to fit well in many people's RV-10
>> panels. I talk to people all the time about their
>> panels, and how they want to add item Q, R, S, T U,
>> V, W, X, Y...and Z. Yeah, we all want tons of cool
>> stuff. Having a monster screen on your Nav/Com/GPS
>> is going to mean eliminating something else to make
>> it fit. Also, these 2 radios are NOT EFIS systems.
>> Garmin really did a good job with the G900/1000,
>> and G3X, of giving you attitude display and a pretty
>> good MFD all in the same screens. Here though
>> you're talking about just a Nav/Com/GPS that makes
>> a pretty good MFD, yet won't give you the reversionary
>> capabilities of a multi-screen EFIS like the G1000/G3X.
>> So the 750 is going to be a pretty hard fit in many
>> panels...at least in the experimental world where
>> I live. And, in the regular certified GA market
>> as an upgrade, it could require very significant
>> rework to fit into an existing stack.
>>
>> So personally, I think that at least in the experimental
>> world, most people will still prefer an EFIS and
>> if they buy the new radios it would be the smaller 650,
>> but use a nice multi-screen system with MFD. I think
>> if they had included more of the standard function
>> buttons, it would be a better radio to use though, so
>> I think that for people with EFIS systems, this may
>> be a great opportunity to nab 430W's at a good price
>> for people who jump on a 650 based on looks alone,
>> without thinking of the things they'll miss by not
>> having buttons.
>>
>> Just my 2 cents....it's pretty, but even Garmin itself
>> has better stuff for most people.
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
>> do not archive
>>
>>
>> On 3/23/2011 10:30 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>>>
>>> http://garmin.blogs.com/pr/2011/03/garmin-announces-the-future-of-avionics-.html#more
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: | Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling |
air
Re: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling air
Ralph,
It=92s OK=85 After all my horrific experiences with the -10 Jam
es
cowl (and it has cost me a boat load so far) I still put a James cowl on my
8A because they are more proven. Knowing what I know now I would not even
consider a James cowl for the -10 as it=92s deficiencies are just too great
.
No heat given=85 we are all just learning & sharing our info.
Robin
Do Not Archive
*From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Ralph E. Capen
*Sent:* Thursday, March 24, 2011 3:53 AM
*To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
*Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine
cooling air
Yup - I took an earlier post as an educational point - my experience is wit
h
my 6A - which I'm happy with.
Like I said before they should have done the same level of research and
testing on the -10 cowl......
Takin the heat - fessin I'm wrong....
-----Original Message-----
>From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
>Sent: Mar 23, 2011 4:57 PM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine
cooling air
>
>
>As one who drank the Koolaid, I would beg to disagree, IMO the Sam James
>cowl intake area is WAY UNDERSIZED, I believe this has been
>substantiated by another -10 builder who did some considerable
>modifications to increase the size of the intake for the SJ cowl/plenum
>and saw improved cooling performance. If you think about it, it stands
>to reason, James uses the same size intake rings for the 6 cyl as he
>does for the 4 cyl ????? Yet there is considerable more area to cool an
>more heat generated. The cowls look sexy, but I cannot attribute ANY
>improvement to speed/performance. However, by way of comparison there is
>a Reduction in the cooling.
>
>Deems
>N519PJ
>
>On 3/23/2011 9:27 AM, Ralph E. Capen wrote:
>> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Ralph E. Capen"<recapen@earthlink.net
>
>>
>> Considering the work that was done to develop the SamJames cowl and
plenum...and how well they work - I think they're a great starting place.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Rodger Todd<rj_todd@yahoo.co.uk>
>>> Sent: Mar 23, 2011 7:42 AM
>>> To: RV10-List@matronics.com
>>> Subject: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine
cooling air
>>>
>>> --> RV10-List message posted by: Rodger Todd<rj_todd@yahoo.co.uk>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Can any of the engineers out there please advise whether there is an
optimal ratio of the cowl inlet to outlet areas for engine air cooling?
>>>
>>> Thanking you all in anticipation,
>>>
>>> Rodger
>>> In Oz where cooling matters
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
------------------------------
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. |
It seems like touch screen would work a lot better as a kneeboard or
on a console. Rubberbanding a route seems hopeless, about as difficult
as writing legibly in the same position. I haven't flown with an ipad
yet but the GPS in my car is mounted vertically next to the rear view
mirror and even on smooth roads it can be difficult to use, especially
doing stuff like entering text on the "keyboard".
Also, I like the fact that I have three major brands in my panel.
They work well together, and if something goes TU I don't have all my
eggs in one basket. I guess you can still spread things around with
this new hardware but the intention seems to be a single-brand
solution.
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA 95076
831-722-9141 Shop
831-750-0284 Cell
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
> Exactly...and that system has knobs, nice separated
> buttons, and a big bezel to rest on. I've had times
> when it took multiple tries just to get frequencies
> entered into my radios...and with touch-screen
> for many features, I just don't know that in
> some situations some functions will be able to be
> done....although Garmin is trying to convince people
> otherwise.
>
> The OS though looks very nice, and if it weren't
> panel mounted, I'd have to say it looks like it
> was done with excellence.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
> do not archive
>
>
> On 3/24/2011 9:44 AM, DLM wrote:
>>
>>
>> Agreed. I was instructing in my 10 and although the student was flying
>> the aircraft, the "chop" was so bad it was difficult to input anything
>> into the Chelton buttons or soft keys.
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 7:03 AM
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: For those that haven't bought their avionics
>> yet..................
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I don't know, I'm not so sure that these boxes will be
>>> functionally preferable in some ways to the stuff we have
>>> right now.
>>>
>>> First, the touchscreen functions will often, when you
>>> really need them, be useless. I know they put finger
>>> holding places so you can secure your hand, but I've
>>> literally been flying on days when your outstretched
>>> arm and hand can hardly be held up steady enough to hit
>>> a button, even with fingers firmly on a bezel.
>>> So features like rubberbanding to change flight plans
>>> and things like that will be useless. Some of the soft
>>> keys will be very hard at times to hit properly, and
>>> with no hard space between buttons, it probably will
>>> be easier to hit the wrong soft key. It is good that
>>> they planned for some of that by adding finger hold
>>> areas, and some critical functions to the very few knobs
>>> that the system has, but personally I believe that
>>> touchscreen has very limited use in a panel mount
>>> environment....but has very extensive use in the
>>> handheld environment, where the tablet/device can
>>> move with your hand during bumps.
>>>
>>> Then we get on to the other big thing that will make
>>> some of the pretty pictures you see, less relevant to
>>> your actual use.
>>>
>>> The 650 looks like it could be a great replacement for
>>> the 430/530. It would fit in fine. But, the 750 is
>>> simply not going to fit well in many people's RV-10
>>> panels. I talk to people all the time about their
>>> panels, and how they want to add item Q, R, S, T U,
>>> V, W, X, Y...and Z. Yeah, we all want tons of cool
>>> stuff. Having a monster screen on your Nav/Com/GPS
>>> is going to mean eliminating something else to make
>>> it fit. Also, these 2 radios are NOT EFIS systems.
>>> Garmin really did a good job with the G900/1000,
>>> and G3X, of giving you attitude display and a pretty
>>> good MFD all in the same screens. Here though
>>> you're talking about just a Nav/Com/GPS that makes
>>> a pretty good MFD, yet won't give you the reversionary
>>> capabilities of a multi-screen EFIS like the G1000/G3X.
>>> So the 750 is going to be a pretty hard fit in many
>>> panels...at least in the experimental world where
>>> I live. And, in the regular certified GA market
>>> as an upgrade, it could require very significant
>>> rework to fit into an existing stack.
>>>
>>> So personally, I think that at least in the experimental
>>> world, most people will still prefer an EFIS and
>>> if they buy the new radios it would be the smaller 650,
>>> but use a nice multi-screen system with MFD. I think
>>> if they had included more of the standard function
>>> buttons, it would be a better radio to use though, so
>>> I think that for people with EFIS systems, this may
>>> be a great opportunity to nab 430W's at a good price
>>> for people who jump on a 650 based on looks alone,
>>> without thinking of the things they'll miss by not
>>> having buttons.
>>>
>>> Just my 2 cents....it's pretty, but even Garmin itself
>>> has better stuff for most people.
>>>
>>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
>>> do not archive
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/23/2011 10:30 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://garmin.blogs.com/pr/2011/03/garmin-announces-the-future-of-avionics-.html#more
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. |
Avweb has a good video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJCGOdD5exY&featurel
At 1:35, check out how a frequency is entered. No way that's easier than on
a 430/530.
Still some pretty cool features, though. True, the big one will be hard to
fit into some existing radio stacks, but if you use the transponder and audo
panel interfaces, that frees up quite a bit of room. That said, I wouldn't
want to have to go through menus to switch from com1 to com2, etc. A
dedicated audio panel is preferable IMO.
-Rob
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Dave Saylor <
dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com> wrote:
> dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
>
> It seems like touch screen would work a lot better as a kneeboard or
> on a console. Rubberbanding a route seems hopeless, about as difficult
> as writing legibly in the same position. I haven't flown with an ipad
> yet but the GPS in my car is mounted vertically next to the rear view
> mirror and even on smooth roads it can be difficult to use, especially
> doing stuff like entering text on the "keyboard".
>
> Also, I like the fact that I have three major brands in my panel.
> They work well together, and if something goes TU I don't have all my
> eggs in one basket. I guess you can still spread things around with
> this new hardware but the intention seems to be a single-brand
> solution.
>
> Dave Saylor
> AirCrafters
> 140 Aviation Way
> Watsonville, CA 95076
> 831-722-9141 Shop
> 831-750-0284 Cell
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
> >
> > Exactly...and that system has knobs, nice separated
> > buttons, and a big bezel to rest on. I've had times
> > when it took multiple tries just to get frequencies
> > entered into my radios...and with touch-screen
> > for many features, I just don't know that in
> > some situations some functions will be able to be
> > done....although Garmin is trying to convince people
> > otherwise.
> >
> > The OS though looks very nice, and if it weren't
> > panel mounted, I'd have to say it looks like it
> > was done with excellence.
> >
> > Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
> > do not archive
> >
> >
> > On 3/24/2011 9:44 AM, DLM wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Agreed. I was instructing in my 10 and although the student was flying
> >> the aircraft, the "chop" was so bad it was difficult to input anything
> >> into the Chelton buttons or soft keys.
> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
> >> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> >> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 7:03 AM
> >> Subject: Re: RV10-List: For those that haven't bought their avionics
> >> yet..................
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I don't know, I'm not so sure that these boxes will be
> >>> functionally preferable in some ways to the stuff we have
> >>> right now.
> >>>
> >>> First, the touchscreen functions will often, when you
> >>> really need them, be useless. I know they put finger
> >>> holding places so you can secure your hand, but I've
> >>> literally been flying on days when your outstretched
> >>> arm and hand can hardly be held up steady enough to hit
> >>> a button, even with fingers firmly on a bezel.
> >>> So features like rubberbanding to change flight plans
> >>> and things like that will be useless. Some of the soft
> >>> keys will be very hard at times to hit properly, and
> >>> with no hard space between buttons, it probably will
> >>> be easier to hit the wrong soft key. It is good that
> >>> they planned for some of that by adding finger hold
> >>> areas, and some critical functions to the very few knobs
> >>> that the system has, but personally I believe that
> >>> touchscreen has very limited use in a panel mount
> >>> environment....but has very extensive use in the
> >>> handheld environment, where the tablet/device can
> >>> move with your hand during bumps.
> >>>
> >>> Then we get on to the other big thing that will make
> >>> some of the pretty pictures you see, less relevant to
> >>> your actual use.
> >>>
> >>> The 650 looks like it could be a great replacement for
> >>> the 430/530. It would fit in fine. But, the 750 is
> >>> simply not going to fit well in many people's RV-10
> >>> panels. I talk to people all the time about their
> >>> panels, and how they want to add item Q, R, S, T U,
> >>> V, W, X, Y...and Z. Yeah, we all want tons of cool
> >>> stuff. Having a monster screen on your Nav/Com/GPS
> >>> is going to mean eliminating something else to make
> >>> it fit. Also, these 2 radios are NOT EFIS systems.
> >>> Garmin really did a good job with the G900/1000,
> >>> and G3X, of giving you attitude display and a pretty
> >>> good MFD all in the same screens. Here though
> >>> you're talking about just a Nav/Com/GPS that makes
> >>> a pretty good MFD, yet won't give you the reversionary
> >>> capabilities of a multi-screen EFIS like the G1000/G3X.
> >>> So the 750 is going to be a pretty hard fit in many
> >>> panels...at least in the experimental world where
> >>> I live. And, in the regular certified GA market
> >>> as an upgrade, it could require very significant
> >>> rework to fit into an existing stack.
> >>>
> >>> So personally, I think that at least in the experimental
> >>> world, most people will still prefer an EFIS and
> >>> if they buy the new radios it would be the smaller 650,
> >>> but use a nice multi-screen system with MFD. I think
> >>> if they had included more of the standard function
> >>> buttons, it would be a better radio to use though, so
> >>> I think that for people with EFIS systems, this may
> >>> be a great opportunity to nab 430W's at a good price
> >>> for people who jump on a 650 based on looks alone,
> >>> without thinking of the things they'll miss by not
> >>> having buttons.
> >>>
> >>> Just my 2 cents....it's pretty, but even Garmin itself
> >>> has better stuff for most people.
> >>>
> >>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
> >>> do not archive
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 3/23/2011 10:30 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> http://garmin.blogs.com/pr/2011/03/garmin-announces-the-future-of-avionics-.html#more
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
Rob Kochman
RV-10 Flying, Phase 1
http://kochman.net/N819K
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: | MT Governor oil leak |
For those with the MT governor who've adjusted the orientation of the
control arm (which I assume is pretty much all of us with the MT), have you
noticed any oil leaks in that area? I'm getting a small one on the top and
front of that circular part (where there's a seam between the main governor
body and the ring that the 6 screws hold down). Anyone seen anything like
this? I'm wondering if I damaged a gasket when reorienting the arm.
-Rob
--
Rob Kochman
RV-10 Flying, Phase 1
http://kochman.net/N819K
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. |
For better or worse (and I think better) touch screen interface in
aircraft, cars, etc are here to stay at least until reliable voice
control or maybe direct mind control :-) comes about. Touch screen
can be done badly, such as the Bendix/King AV8OR line, and it can be
done well such as Garmin and iPad.
Anchoring your hand with an intuitive touch screen interface is IMHO
quicker and easier for data entry than knobs or buttons. I've flown
with my land Nuvi RAM mounted on the panel and iPad and have no issues
with entering commands in turbulence. If you look on the Avweb video
you will see the Garmin pilot rest three fingers on the bezel while
entering commands with his index finger. All operations were faster
than if those commands were being entered with knobs. When done this
was, data entry is effortless. If you allow you hand to freely float
above the screen it will be difficult.
The F-18 Super Hornet upgrade and the next generation F-35 fighter has
touch screen interfaces. The military usually invests a significant
amount of time and money in human factory testing. If touch screen was
such a bad thing, no consideration would be given to using it in the
"turbulent" environment of a combat cockpit.
In 1998 Garmin introduced the GNS-430 with a list price of $10,995.
In 2007? Garmin introduced the GNS-430W with a list price of $11,295.
In 2011 Garmin introduces the GTN 650 with a list price of $11,495.
Is this a new product too fast or too expensive? I guess it is a
matter of perspective. For comparison, consider that the Bendix/King
KX-155 Nav/Comm transceiver with glidescope has a list price of
$5,008.
--
William
N40237 - http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Dave Saylor
<dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It seems like touch screen would work a lot better as a kneeboard or
> on a console. Rubberbanding a route seems hopeless, about as difficult
> as writing legibly in the same position. I haven't flown with an ipad
> yet but the GPS in my car is mounted vertically next to the rear view
> mirror and even on smooth roads it can be difficult to use, especially
> doing stuff like entering text on the "keyboard".
>
> Also, I like the fact that I have three major brands in my panel.
> They work well together, and if something goes TU I don't have all my
> eggs in one basket. I guess you can still spread things around with
> this new hardware but the intention seems to be a single-brand
> solution.
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: | For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. |
I have a suspicion that in radio frequency mode that the concentric knobs
may work the radio frequencies too. Just a guess.
While I do think there can be issues managing the display in turbulence lots
of things are difficult in the bumps. I doubt this is any more difficult and
in many ways much faster. Where I see a problem are in places like my RV-8A
when the stack is on the left when someone is extremely right handed. Bumps
and the awkward use of the left hand may be a challenge.
One additional thing I noticed on the YouTube video (below) is the
relatively slow refresh rate of the map display (4:00 minute mark). It seems
to reload in sections. I would hope a unit like this would have a powerful
enough processor to instantly redisplay the map. I guess I am just too
spoiled after upgrading to the new A5 based iPad2. J
Robin
*From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Rob Kochman
*Sent:* Thursday, March 24, 2011 10:21 AM
*To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
*Subject:* Re: RV10-List: For those that haven't bought their avionics
yet..................
Avweb has a good video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJCGOdD5exY&featurel
At 1:35, check out how a frequency is entered. No way that's easier than on
a 430/530.
Still some pretty cool features, though. True, the big one will be hard to
fit into some existing radio stacks, but if you use the transponder and audo
panel interfaces, that frees up quite a bit of room. That said, I wouldn't
want to have to go through menus to switch from com1 to com2, etc. A
dedicated audio panel is preferable IMO.
-Rob
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Dave Saylor <
dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com> wrote:
dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
It seems like touch screen would work a lot better as a kneeboard or
on a console. Rubberbanding a route seems hopeless, about as difficult
as writing legibly in the same position. I haven't flown with an ipad
yet but the GPS in my car is mounted vertically next to the rear view
mirror and even on smooth roads it can be difficult to use, especially
doing stuff like entering text on the "keyboard".
Also, I like the fact that I have three major brands in my panel.
They work well together, and if something goes TU I don't have all my
eggs in one basket. I guess you can still spread things around with
this new hardware but the intention seems to be a single-brand
solution.
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA 95076
831-722-9141 Shop
831-750-0284 Cell
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com> wrote:
>
> Exactly...and that system has knobs, nice separated
> buttons, and a big bezel to rest on. I've had times
> when it took multiple tries just to get frequencies
> entered into my radios...and with touch-screen
> for many features, I just don't know that in
> some situations some functions will be able to be
> done....although Garmin is trying to convince people
> otherwise.
>
> The OS though looks very nice, and if it weren't
> panel mounted, I'd have to say it looks like it
> was done with excellence.
>
> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
> do not archive
>
>
> On 3/24/2011 9:44 AM, DLM wrote:
>>
>>
>> Agreed. I was instructing in my 10 and although the student was flying
>> the aircraft, the "chop" was so bad it was difficult to input anything
>> into the Chelton buttons or soft keys.
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
>> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 7:03 AM
>> Subject: Re: RV10-List: For those that haven't bought their avionics
>> yet..................
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I don't know, I'm not so sure that these boxes will be
>>> functionally preferable in some ways to the stuff we have
>>> right now.
>>>
>>> First, the touchscreen functions will often, when you
>>> really need them, be useless. I know they put finger
>>> holding places so you can secure your hand, but I've
>>> literally been flying on days when your outstretched
>>> arm and hand can hardly be held up steady enough to hit
>>> a button, even with fingers firmly on a bezel.
>>> So features like rubberbanding to change flight plans
>>> and things like that will be useless. Some of the soft
>>> keys will be very hard at times to hit properly, and
>>> with no hard space between buttons, it probably will
>>> be easier to hit the wrong soft key. It is good that
>>> they planned for some of that by adding finger hold
>>> areas, and some critical functions to the very few knobs
>>> that the system has, but personally I believe that
>>> touchscreen has very limited use in a panel mount
>>> environment....but has very extensive use in the
>>> handheld environment, where the tablet/device can
>>> move with your hand during bumps.
>>>
>>> Then we get on to the other big thing that will make
>>> some of the pretty pictures you see, less relevant to
>>> your actual use.
>>>
>>> The 650 looks like it could be a great replacement for
>>> the 430/530. It would fit in fine. But, the 750 is
>>> simply not going to fit well in many people's RV-10
>>> panels. I talk to people all the time about their
>>> panels, and how they want to add item Q, R, S, T U,
>>> V, W, X, Y...and Z. Yeah, we all want tons of cool
>>> stuff. Having a monster screen on your Nav/Com/GPS
>>> is going to mean eliminating something else to make
>>> it fit. Also, these 2 radios are NOT EFIS systems.
>>> Garmin really did a good job with the G900/1000,
>>> and G3X, of giving you attitude display and a pretty
>>> good MFD all in the same screens. Here though
>>> you're talking about just a Nav/Com/GPS that makes
>>> a pretty good MFD, yet won't give you the reversionary
>>> capabilities of a multi-screen EFIS like the G1000/G3X.
>>> So the 750 is going to be a pretty hard fit in many
>>> panels...at least in the experimental world where
>>> I live. And, in the regular certified GA market
>>> as an upgrade, it could require very significant
>>> rework to fit into an existing stack.
>>>
>>> So personally, I think that at least in the experimental
>>> world, most people will still prefer an EFIS and
>>> if they buy the new radios it would be the smaller 650,
>>> but use a nice multi-screen system with MFD. I think
>>> if they had included more of the standard function
>>> buttons, it would be a better radio to use though, so
>>> I think that for people with EFIS systems, this may
>>> be a great opportunity to nab 430W's at a good price
>>> for people who jump on a 650 based on looks alone,
>>> without thinking of the things they'll miss by not
>>> having buttons.
>>>
>>> Just my 2 cents....it's pretty, but even Garmin itself
>>> has better stuff for most people.
>>>
>>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
>>> do not archive
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/23/2011 10:30 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
http://garmin.blogs.com/pr/2011/03/garmin-announces-the-future-of-avionics-.html#more
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>*
Browse, Chat, FAQ,
="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List" target="_blank">http://===
http://forums.mle, List Admin.
====
<http://forums.matronics.com/>*
*
--
<http://forums.matronics.com/>*
*Rob Kochman
RV-10 Flying, Phase 1 <http://forums.matronics.com/>*
*http://kochman.net/N819K*
* *
* *
* *
* *
*
------------------------------
*
*No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
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: | Re: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet.................. |
Did I miss something or did they not say that you could still do the input
via the knobs if you wanted too? So... if it was very turbulent and you
were having issues, couldn't you just revert back to the old method of
input?
I really like the idea of being able to input airways directly. In the
video it shows them selecting a vor and then all of the airways showed up in
a list. slick!
Shannon
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:43 PM, William Curtis <wcurtis@nerv10.com> wrote:
>
> For better or worse (and I think better) touch screen interface in
> aircraft, cars, etc are here to stay at least until reliable voice
> control or maybe direct mind control :-) comes about. Touch screen
> can be done badly, such as the Bendix/King AV8OR line, and it can be
> done well such as Garmin and iPad.
>
> Anchoring your hand with an intuitive touch screen interface is IMHO
> quicker and easier for data entry than knobs or buttons. I've flown
> with my land Nuvi RAM mounted on the panel and iPad and have no issues
> with entering commands in turbulence. If you look on the Avweb video
> you will see the Garmin pilot rest three fingers on the bezel while
> entering commands with his index finger. All operations were faster
> than if those commands were being entered with knobs. When done this
> was, data entry is effortless. If you allow you hand to freely float
> above the screen it will be difficult.
>
> The F-18 Super Hornet upgrade and the next generation F-35 fighter has
> touch screen interfaces. The military usually invests a significant
> amount of time and money in human factory testing. If touch screen was
> such a bad thing, no consideration would be given to using it in the
> "turbulent" environment of a combat cockpit.
>
> In 1998 Garmin introduced the GNS-430 with a list price of $10,995.
> In 2007? Garmin introduced the GNS-430W with a list price of $11,295.
> In 2011 Garmin introduces the GTN 650 with a list price of $11,495.
>
> Is this a new product too fast or too expensive? I guess it is a
> matter of perspective. For comparison, consider that the Bendix/King
> KX-155 Nav/Comm transceiver with glidescope has a list price of
> $5,008.
>
> --
> William
> N40237 - http://wcurtis.nerv10.com/
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Dave Saylor
> <dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com> wrote:
> dave.saylor.aircrafters@gmail.com>
> >
> > It seems like touch screen would work a lot better as a kneeboard or
> > on a console. Rubberbanding a route seems hopeless, about as difficult
> > as writing legibly in the same position. I haven't flown with an ipad
> > yet but the GPS in my car is mounted vertically next to the rear view
> > mirror and even on smooth roads it can be difficult to use, especially
> > doing stuff like entering text on the "keyboard".
> >
> > Also, I like the fact that I have three major brands in my panel.
> > They work well together, and if something goes TU I don't have all my
> > eggs in one basket. I guess you can still spread things around with
> > this new hardware but the intention seems to be a single-brand
> > solution.
>
>
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: | Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling |
air
Now, Deems -
Sam is perfectly reasonable and more than willing to help.
As long as you see things his way... ;)
Neal
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Deems Davis
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling
air
FYI
Even though everyone refers to them as the Sam James Cowls, Sam only
builds the Plenum, his son Will builds the Cowls, they are as different
as night and day to talk to. Will is extremely helpful over the phone.
Deems
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: | Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine cooling |
air
I have recently heard that there is a modified cowl from James with
improved cooling.
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robin Marks
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 10:59 AM
Subject: RE: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine
cooling air
Ralph,
Its OK After all my horrific experiences with the -10 James cowl (and it
has cost me a boat load so far) I still put a James cowl on my 8A
because they are more proven. Knowing what I know now I would not even
consider a James cowl for the -10 as its deficiencies are just too
great.
No heat given we are all just learning & sharing our info.
Robin
Do Not Archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ralph E.
Capen
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 3:53 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine
cooling air
<recapen@earthlink.net>
Yup - I took an earlier post as an educational point - my experience is
with my 6A - which I'm happy with.
Like I said before they should have done the same level of research and
testing on the -10 cowl......
Takin the heat - fessin I'm wrong....
-----Original Message-----
>From: Deems Davis <deemsdavis@cox.net>
>Sent: Mar 23, 2011 4:57 PM
>To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine
cooling air
>
>
>As one who drank the Koolaid, I would beg to disagree, IMO the Sam
James
>cowl intake area is WAY UNDERSIZED, I believe this has been
>substantiated by another -10 builder who did some considerable
>modifications to increase the size of the intake for the SJ cowl/plenum
>and saw improved cooling performance. If you think about it, it stands
>to reason, James uses the same size intake rings for the 6 cyl as he
>does for the 4 cyl ????? Yet there is considerable more area to cool an
>more heat generated. The cowls look sexy, but I cannot attribute ANY
>improvement to speed/performance. However, by way of comparison there
is
>a Reduction in the cooling.
>
>Deems
>N519PJ
>
>On 3/23/2011 9:27 AM, Ralph E. Capen wrote:
Capen"<recapen@earthlink.net>
>>
>> Considering the work that was done to develop the SamJames cowl and
plenum...and how well they work - I think they're a great starting
place.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Rodger Todd<rj_todd@yahoo.co.uk>
>>> Sent: Mar 23, 2011 7:42 AM
>>> To: RV10-List@matronics.com
>>> Subject: RV10-List: Optimal cowl intake and outlet areas for engine
cooling air
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Can any of the engineers out there please advise whether there is an
optimal ratio of the cowl inlet to outlet areas for engine air cooling?
>>>
>>> Thanking you all in anticipation,
>>>
>>> Rodger
>>> In Oz where cooling matters
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
f="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.c
o
m======================
= -->
http://forums.matr===================
-Mattcom/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
<http://forums.matronics.com>
________________________________
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
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: Matco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement write-upMatco RV-10 |
Nosewheel Axle replacement write-up
One of the items that was bothering me about the rear tubes was the angle
the stem comes out of the tire. It made for checking the pressure rather
hard, usually I lost 1-2psi just trying to get the gauge in there to check
it. I discovered yesterday that Desser sells a tube for the 15-600/6 tires
that has a stem with a 75 degree angle on it. I ordered a couple as it
bothers me enough to just put in now versus continuing to deal with the
current stem.
http://www.desser.com/store/products/15%7B47%7D600%252d6-%22LEAKGUARD%22-BUTYL-TUBE-(New-Easy-Valve).html
Pascal
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Olson
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Matco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement write-upMatco
RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement write-up
This weekend I decided to install all my new 3 tires I bought
last fall, since I'm going to perhaps be landing on not the
most improved runways shortly. My nose tire is at basically
700 hours. My mains I've just installed my 3rd set at
basically 700 hours. The Desser 15/6.00-6 High Performance
Retreads really did well for me...they had plenty of beef left
to them and would have lasted dramatically longer than the
ones that came with the kit. The rubber is just plain better,
from the sounds of it. All 3 tires that I just replaced could
have gone another 50-100 hours probably, and I would have
just kept using them if I weren't going out of the US and I
just can't risk not having easy tire access.
My complication came with the nosewheel.
As many people already know, the NW501.25 that comes with
the kit isn't meant for the tire/tube that we use. The proper
wheel is NW511.25, and if you haven't installed yours
yet, you should just return your NW501.25, and buy a new
one from Matco, or at least contact them for a swap.
Here is my old write-up on the subject.
http://www.myrv10.com/N104CD/upgrades/20090120/index.html
So when I went to replace the nose wheel, I installed a new
tire, and leakguard tube. Whereas before, my stem cleared
plenty good, even with a valve cap on it, it now interfered
by AT LEAST as much as it had cleared before...at least
1/8 to 3/16". I tried bending the stem a little, but after
2 attempts, I broke the stem...$50 down the toilet. I was
cursing the whole time, as I finally experienced what many
other people already had.
I continued on by installing my old tube, which fit ok,
and has clearance again. This got me even more confused,
but there was a difference...my stem had a joggle on it on
the old tube.
So today, I said screw this, and ordered an entire new
nosewheel assembly from Matco, and a new tube. But in
talking with them, I learned something that we haven't really
discussed before...the big "new" part of this whole ordeal...
there are apparently 2 different types of tubes...one is
by Desser, and the other is some other company...I can't
remember the name but it rang a bell...maybe because it
came with the kit.
The difference is the joggle....the desser stem is straight,
and the other stem has the joggle...and that makes all
the difference in the world. Yes, the stupid NW501.25 style
rim should have never been sold with the kit in the first place,
but, knowing there were 2 different tubes makes me understand
why this wasn't a universal problem among us.
So, with the new NW511.25 wheel and tube, and a new 5.00x5
tire, I'm probably good until 1500 hours. Anyone want to buy
a NW501.25 real cheap? I should melt it down and send it
to Vans.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
On 2/12/2009 11:57 AM, pascal wrote:
>
> Although one may argue that the cap is not necessary, with my finishing
> kit and following the instructions to a "t" there is no way I would have
> been able to work a solution to allow me to keep a cap on the valve. I
> had close to 1/8th overlap with the cap and 1/16th without, even moving
> spacers and such would not have worked for me.
> I simply want to let many know that in this case what may not work for
> me or Tim may or may not work for someone else. Given the chance get the
> right tool for the job, in this case the right rim, you can do what I
> did and see if it's going to impact you and if it does replace it or you
> can just do as many have said, tell Van's to keep the "wrong" rim and
> order the right one directly either Grove or Matco.
> I ended up ordering a new rim with the axle, I could have tested the new
> axle and seen if that solved the gap issue before possibly needing to
> replace the rim but I'm okay with having replaced it with the "right"
> piece.
> Pascal
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Tim Olson" <Tim@MyRV10.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 8:43 AM
> To: <rv10-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Matco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement
> write-upMatco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement write-up
>
>>
>> If you have a Matco nosewheel axle for them, you shouldn't have
>> a problem running a valve cap on the stem, regardless of the wheel
>> you use. With the "right" wheel you'll have tons of clearance,
>> with the "wrong" wheel it'll still work fine. Just note that
>> I've had all versions of axles/spacers from Van's, And the
>> Matco Axle setup, and I've always had the "wrong" wheel, and
>> I STILL have always been able to always run a valve cap. I
>> just didn't have as much clearance in the past as I do now, now
>> that I have the Matco Axle setup. For that matter, even if
>> something weren't yet perfect, it could be fixed easily by
>> shaving a 1/16" off of the spacer on one side of the
>> axle, and adding a large flat washer on the other side.
>> But I hesitate to even say that because that's going to an
>> extreme that is probably way unnecessary.
>>
>> Also, if you order the grove nosewheel, I don't think you want
>> the Matco axle assy, from what it sounds like...although I've
>> never seen a grove axle assembly picture.
>>
>>
>> Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
>> do not archive
>>
>>
>> Bob and Karen Brown wrote:
>>> OK, earlier this week, I ordered the Matco nosewheel axle for both
>>> the RV7A and the RV10. Heres my question, does that mean I still
>>> have to order the Grove nosewheel if I want to put on the darned
>>> valve stem cap? If I order just the Grove nosewheel, do I still NEED
>>> the Matco nosewheel axle assy? Call me confused
>>>
>>> *From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of
>>> *ricksked@embarqmail.com
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 11, 2009 8:20 PM
>>> *To:* Rv
>>> *Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Matco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement
>>> write-upMatco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement write-up
>>>
>>> FWIW, as a late post on my part, I bought the Grove wheel and
>>> axel...only thing I can say is it's really nice to have a complete
>>> engineered WORKING assembly with no valve stem, bearing preload or
>>> spacers to deal with....I hope that this is the final answer to what
>>> equates to a very simple engineering solution...the nose wheel never
>>> should have generated this much trouble...I knew there would be a
>>> point in my life I would regret not getting my P.E. Stamp...
>>>
>>> Rick Sked
>>> 40185
>>> Oh so close
>>>
>>> Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> *From*: John Gonzalez
>>> *Date*: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 19:49:50 -0800
>>> *To*: RV 10 group<rv10-list@matronics.com>
>>> *Subject*: RE: RV10-List: Matco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement
>>> write-upMatco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement write-up
>>>
>>> Okay. I am about to put the nose whell on the plane=2C but I am
>>> ordering th= e SS axle. If I stick with the current wheel=2C I know
>>> it will work with th= e SS axle=2C but i will not be able to put the
>>> valve stem cap on...is this = correct.-
>>>
>>> If I call Matco and ask for the other half o= f the rim=2C will it
>>> work with the SS axle???
>>>
>>> I am= inclined to leaving the valve cover off. Talk about making
>>> thing complicat= ed...Good grief Charlie Brown!
>>>
>>> What else am I miss= ing?
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> > From: pascal@rv10builder.net
>>> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>>> > Subject: Re: RV10-List: Matco RV-10 Nos= ewheel Axle replacement
>>> write-upMatco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement wri= te-up
>>> > Date: Wed=2C 11 Feb 2009 18:34:36 -0800
>>> >
>>> > --> RV10-List= message posted by: "pascal" <=3Bpascal@rv10builder.net>
>>> >
>>> > yep!<= br>>
>>> > WHLNW511.25=2C just in case
>>> >
>>> > P
>>> >
>>> > ------------= --------------------------------------
>>> > From: "RV Builder (Michael Saus= en)" <=3Brvbuilder@sausen.net>
>>> > Sent: Wednesday=2C February 11=2C 200= 9 5:39 PM
>>> > To: <=3Brv10-list@matronics.com>
>>> > Subject: RE: RV10-Li= st: Matco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement
>>> write-upMatco
>>> > RV-10 Nosewh= eel Axle replacement write-up
>>> >
>>> >> <=3Brvbuilder@sausen.net>
>>> >>
>>> >= > Don't recall off hand but they know as soon as you say RV-10.
>>> >>
>>> >>= michael
>>> >>
>>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>> >> From: owner-rv10-list= -server@matronics.com
>>> >> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] = On Behalf Of Carl
>>> Froehlich
>>> >> Sent: Wednesday=2C February 11=2C 2009 8:= 07 PM
>>> >> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>>> >> Subject: RE: RV10-List: Matco= RV-10 Nosewheel Axle replacement
>>> >> write-upMatco RV-10 Nosewheel Axle= replacement write-up
>>> >>
>>> <=3Bcarl.froehlich@cox.net>
>>> >>
>>> >> What is the correct whee= l to ask for?
>>> >>
>>> >> Carl Froehlich
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >= =====================
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>> 3D=======================================================================================================================================href="3D">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> 3D============================================
>>> *
>>>
>>> ~,
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> g
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: For those that haven't bought their avionics yet............ |
> Did I miss something or did they not say that you could still do the input via
the knobs if you wanted too? So... if it was very turbulent and you were having
issues, couldn't you just revert back to the old method of input?
No you didn't miss it.
Everybody else did.
--------
Mike
Sydney, Australia
Pitts Model 12 under construction.
"Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please."
Mark Twain. Writer.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=334980#334980
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: WingX 7 for iPad |
Tim,
We really appreciate you being on the leading edge to help guide us not-so-geeky
folks. I have been looking at ht iPad2 and wondering which one we need for
these apps. Do recommend the 16, 32, or 64GB?
--------
Dave Moore
RV-6 flying
RV-10 QB - FWF
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=334989#334989
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: QB Kit Primer |
Any of the ketones (like MEK) should work.
--------
Dave Moore
RV-6 flying
RV-10 QB - FWF
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=334992#334992
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: RV-8 Insurance... |
AIG as an aviation underwriter was sold off of the parent firm. It is
now Chartis. AFAIK it always was pretty separate from the divisions
that did the evil credit default swaps.
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 8:09 AM, Bob Turner <bobturner@alum.rpi.edu> wrote:
>
> Matt,
>
> You are correct. AIG and USAIG are different companies.
>
> We had USAIG for many years on the 182 and they had a nice "plain language" policy
that you didn't have to be a lawyer to read.
>
> Bob
>
> --------
> Bob Turner
> RV-10 QB
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=334912#334912
>
>
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: WingX 7 for iPad |
Hi Dave,
Personally, I get only the 64Gb version with 3G. This is because only the 3G versions
have a built-in gps, and that can be very handy. Mine actually works
well that way so often I only use the built-in gps, especially in the car. The
16Gb version would just work for most people if they only want it for one main
app, like foreflight or wingX. But, I would never ever go with a 16....always
get at least 32Gb. The aviation chart and plates take up quite a bit if space.
At 32GB, most people would be ok with a couple good, big, charting apps
and some other stuff.
64GB will give you the option for storage for lots of music, or a dozen or more
movies for layovers waiting for weather, or for kids entertainment. So I always
go big. In fact, I'm a bit disappointed that the iPad2 didn't come with
128GB, because I would have got that one just for movie space for the kids.
One other tip....I use Goodreader, and with that, I have almost every manual for
every item jn the plane, in .PDF form on the ipad, and also put PDF prints of
websites and stuff for vacations on the ipad....and copies of the ASRS form,
and insurance policy,
Copies of my pilot cert, medical, airworthiness, radio station license, and just
about every bit of info anyone could need...all on the ipad with me on my trips.
So, it's very handy for all of that stuff too.
In fact, on this trip to Mexico, I needed CH-22 WAC. Rather than buy it, I downloaded
the zipped .tif from the government, and good reader displays it great....so
still paper free....and cash free.
You'll never be sorry for going too big....just broke. ;)
Tim
On Mar 24, 2011, at 10:23 PM, "nukeflyboy" <flymoore@charter.net> wrote:
>
> Tim,
>
> We really appreciate you being on the leading edge to help guide us not-so-geeky
folks. I have been looking at ht iPad2 and wondering which one we need for
these apps. Do recommend the 16, 32, or 64GB?
>
> --------
> Dave Moore
> RV-6 flying
> RV-10 QB - FWF
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=334989#334989
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: WingX 7 for iPad |
Re: RV10-List: Re: WingX 7 for iPad
Regarding WingX 7 for the ipad. I spoke with Seattle Avionics yesterday and
they said if you purchase the SA subscription for WingX 7 the same
subscription would drive both Beacon & Sky Radar. I took a quick look at
both apps and didn=92t see anything special if one already has ForeFlight a
nd
WingX7 however I claim to be no expert. I do know that the SA data is *
included* with the ForeFlight HD Pro app (at a higher subscription rate) an
d
not usable with any other app.
Robin
*From:* owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *Tim Olson
*Sent:* Thursday, March 24, 2011 9:31 PM
*To:* rv10-list@matronics.com
*Subject:* Re: RV10-List: Re: WingX 7 for iPad
Hi Dave,
Personally, I get only the 64Gb version with 3G. This is because only the
3G versions have a built-in gps, and that can be very handy. Mine actually
works well that way so often I only use the built-in gps, especially in the
car. The 16Gb version would just work for most people if they only want it
for one main app, like foreflight or wingX. But, I would never ever go wit
h
a 16....always get at least 32Gb. The aviation chart and plates take up
quite a bit if space. At 32GB, most people would be ok with a couple good,
big, charting apps and some other stuff.
64GB will give you the option for storage for lots of music, or a dozen or
more movies for layovers waiting for weather, or for kids entertainment. S
o
I always go big. In fact, I'm a bit disappointed that the iPad2 didn't com
e
with 128GB, because I would have got that one just for movie space for the
kids.
One other tip....I use Goodreader, and with that, I have almost every manua
l
for every item jn the plane, in .PDF form on the ipad, and also put PDF
prints of websites and stuff for vacations on the ipad....and copies of the
ASRS form, and insurance policy,
Copies of my pilot cert, medical, airworthiness, radio station license, and
just about every bit of info anyone could need...all on the ipad with me on
my trips. So, it's very handy for all of that stuff too.
In fact, on this trip to Mexico, I needed CH-22 WAC. Rather than buy it, I
downloaded the zipped .tif from the government, and good reader displays it
great....so still paper free....and cash free.
You'll never be sorry for going too big....just broke. ;)
Tim
On Mar 24, 2011, at 10:23 PM, "nukeflyboy" <flymoore@charter.net> wrote:
>
> Tim,
>
> We really appreciate you being on the leading edge to help guide us
not-so-geeky folks. I have been looking at ht iPad2 and wondering which on
e
we need for these apps. Do recommend the 16, 32, or 64GB?
>
> --------
> Dave Moore
> RV-6 flying
> RV-10 QB - FWF
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=334989#334989
>
>
------------------------------
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
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! --
|