Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:55 AM - Re: Garmin XM weather (Shannon Hicks)
2. 06:31 AM - Rudder gust lock (Chris Hukill)
3. 06:55 AM - Re: Rudder gust lock (Robin Marks)
4. 07:15 AM - Re: Rudder gust lock (DLM)
5. 07:15 AM - Re: Rudder gust lock (Sean Stephens)
6. 07:33 AM - Re: Rudder gust lock (Robin Marks)
7. 08:09 AM - Flare Fitting Torque (Sean Stephens)
8. 08:14 AM - Re: Garmin XM weather (Patrick Thyssen)
9. 08:50 AM - Re: Rudder gust lock (Deems Davis)
10. 08:56 AM - Re: Garmin XM weather (Michael Kraus)
11. 08:56 AM - Re: Garmin XM weather (Michael Kraus)
12. 09:26 AM - Re: Rudder gust lock (fehdxlbb@gmail.com)
13. 11:48 AM - Re: Flare Fitting Torque (John Cox)
14. 12:15 PM - Re: Flare Fitting Torque (Deems Davis)
15. 12:26 PM - Re: Flare Fitting Torque (Sean Stephens)
16. 12:40 PM - Re: Flare Fitting Torque (Tim Olson)
17. 05:38 PM - Re: Flare Fitting Torque (rv10flyer)
18. 11:02 PM - Re: Re: Flare Fitting Torque (John Cox)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Garmin XM weather |
The $700 one.
On Apr 28, 2011 9:17 PM, "Robin Marks" <robin@painttheweb.com> wrote:
> Shannon,
> On which subscription did you receive a 50% discount? And thanks for the
> tip.
>
> Robin
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Shannon Hicks <civeng123@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>> When I called Garmin tech support yesterday, the prerecorded message
stated
>> that the update was NOT mandatory for 696 users.
>>
>> BTW, I complained about the price of the updates in relation to the cost
of
>> just purchasing an IPAD and using foreflight and they gave me a 50%
discount
>> code for the yearly subscription!
>>
>> Shannon
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Miller John <gengrumpy@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> According to the download synopsis, it is all technical with XM weather
>>> transmission and has nothing to do with Jepp cycles.
>>>
>>> I glanced through the OS changes that scrolled by before doing the
>>> install. Once you complete the install, you cannot see those anymore.
>>>
>>> grumpy
>>>
>>> do not archive
>>>
>>> On Apr 28, 2011, at 2:22 PM, John Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> > May 5th is the beginning of Jeppesen cycle 1105 which runs through
June
>>> > 1. What might the connection be?
>>> >
>>> > John
>>> >
>>> > ----Original Message-----
>>> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>>> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Miller John
>>> > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 11:52 AM
>>> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>>> > Subject: RV10-List: Garmin XM weather
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > For those using Garmin XM weather, Garmin put out a notice for a
>>> > mandatory OS update.
>>> >
>>> > Garmin states that their XM weather units will no longer work after 5
>>> > May without the new update.
>>> >
>>> > grumpy
>>> > N184JM
>>> >
>>> > do not archive
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> ==========
>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>> ==========
>>> le, List Admin.
>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> ==========
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>>
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: | Rudder gust lock |
I am trying to figure out how to create a rudder gust lock that is on
the rudder, not the pedals. I would rather control the movement at the
source rather than 20 feet away at the pedals. My RV8 has a 1/8 inch
thick angle longeron that runs aft at the same height as the rudder
horn, to which you mount the external rudder stops. A couple of U shaped
pieces of stainless rod connecting the horn to the stops acts as a
ground lock. The problem with the 10 is there is no longeron down by the
rudder horn to mount a similar type of bracket. I could make a bracket
that mounts through the skin and into the aft bulkhead of the tailcone
at the proper height to mate up to the horn, but I would like to hear if
anyone else has used a similar approach, and could send me a picture of
the results.
Chris Hukill
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: Rudder gust lock |
Chris, this is exactly what we did on my -10 and I think it's an excellent
solution. Very simple to install & remove, extremely light & compact. Just
hang a huge Remove Before Flight ribbon off of it and you are set. Mine
clips on to my pitot tube cover when not in use so I pull both out at the
same time.
Sorry I am on the road and do not have any photos to share. I have posted
images in the past so they should be in the archives. Ping me in 3 days if
you want a photo posted.
Robin
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Chris Hukill <cjhukill@cox.net> wrote:
> I am trying to figure out how to create a rudder gust lock that is on the
> rudder, not the pedals. I would rather control the movement at the source
> rather than 20 feet away at the pedals. My RV8 has a 1/8 inch thick angle
> longeron that runs aft at the same height as the rudder horn, to which you
> mount the external rudder stops. A couple of U shaped pieces of stainless
> rod connecting the horn to the stops acts as a ground lock. The problem with
> the 10 is there is no longeron down by the rudder horn to mount a similar
> type of bracket. I could make a bracket that mounts through the skin and
> into the aft bulkhead of the tailcone at the proper height to mate up to the
> horn, but I would like to hear if anyone else has used a similar approach,
> and could send me a picture of the results.
> Chris Hukill
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
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: Rudder gust lock |
two alumium angles (1/8") 24" long); padded with foam (attach foam with
RTV) single long bolt thru the center of each angle; paint RED; use wing
nut on bolt. This will securely lock rudder when inserted at/around the
lower hinge.
If desired make a smaller one for the aileron and/or elevator.
I use the belts for control lock, except rudder, for short periods;
otherwise I use individual control locks on each surface.
light weight but very secure.
----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Hukill
To: rv10-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 6:27 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Rudder gust lock
I am trying to figure out how to create a rudder gust lock that is on
the rudder, not the pedals. I would rather control the movement at the
source rather than 20 feet away at the pedals. My RV8 has a 1/8 inch
thick angle longeron that runs aft at the same height as the rudder
horn, to which you mount the external rudder stops. A couple of U shaped
pieces of stainless rod connecting the horn to the stops acts as a
ground lock. The problem with the 10 is there is no longeron down by the
rudder horn to mount a similar type of bracket. I could make a bracket
that mounts through the skin and into the aft bulkhead of the tailcone
at the proper height to mate up to the horn, but I would like to hear if
anyone else has used a similar approach, and could send me a picture of
the results.
Chris Hukill
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rudder gust lock |
Here's a link to Robin's rudder gust lock pictures...
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=58911
-Sean #40303
On 4/29/11 8:51 AM, Robin Marks wrote:
> Chris, this is exactly what we did on my -10 and I think it's an
> excellent solution. Very simple to install & remove, extremely light &
> compact. Just hang a huge Remove Before Flight ribbon off of it and
> you are set. Mine clips on to my pitot tube cover when not in use so I
> pull both out at the same time.
> Sorry I am on the road and do not have any photos to share. I have
> posted images in the past so they should be in the archives. Ping me
> in 3 days if you want a photo posted.
>
> Robin
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Chris Hukill <cjhukill@cox.net
> <mailto:cjhukill@cox.net>> wrote:
>
> I am trying to figure out how to create a rudder gust lock that is
> on the rudder, not the pedals. I would rather control the movement
> at the source rather than 20 feet away at the pedals. My RV8 has a
> 1/8 inch thick angle longeron that runs aft at the same height as
> the rudder horn, to which you mount the external rudder stops. A
> couple of U shaped pieces of stainless rod connecting the horn to
> the stops acts as a ground lock. The problem with the 10 is there
> is no longeron down by the rudder horn to mount a similar type of
> bracket. I could make a bracket that mounts through the skin and
> into the aft bulkhead of the tailcone at the proper height to mate
> up to the horn, but I would like to hear if anyone else has used a
> similar approach, and could send me a picture of the results.
> Chris Hukill
>
> *
>
> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> tp://forums.matronics.com
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rudder gust lock |
Thanks Sean!
OK, on all my other RV's we built gust locks that "dropped" down instead of
the way this one is done with one down leg & one leg going up. This was a
test unit that worked well so I moved on to other items on "the list". At
some point we may fabricate a new unit that just "drops" into place. There
is no benefit to the one up one down design. Regardless it works GREAT in
either configuration but the drop into place design has gravity working for
you and is a touch easier to install.
Robin
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Sean Stephens <sean@stephensville.com>wrote:
>
> Here's a link to Robin's rudder gust lock pictures...
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?t=58911
>
> -Sean #40303
>
>
> On 4/29/11 8:51 AM, Robin Marks wrote:
>
>> Chris, this is exactly what we did on my -10 and I think it's an excellent
>> solution. Very simple to install & remove, extremely light & compact. Just
>> hang a huge Remove Before Flight ribbon off of it and you are set. Mine
>> clips on to my pitot tube cover when not in use so I pull both out at the
>> same time.
>> Sorry I am on the road and do not have any photos to share. I have posted
>> images in the past so they should be in the archives. Ping me in 3 days if
>> you want a photo posted.
>>
>> Robin
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Chris Hukill <cjhukill@cox.net <mailto:
>> cjhukill@cox.net>> wrote:
>>
>> I am trying to figure out how to create a rudder gust lock that is
>> on the rudder, not the pedals. I would rather control the movement
>> at the source rather than 20 feet away at the pedals. My RV8 has a
>> 1/8 inch thick angle longeron that runs aft at the same height as
>> the rudder horn, to which you mount the external rudder stops. A
>> couple of U shaped pieces of stainless rod connecting the horn to
>> the stops acts as a ground lock. The problem with the 10 is there
>> is no longeron down by the rudder horn to mount a similar type of
>> bracket. I could make a bracket that mounts through the skin and
>> into the aft bulkhead of the tailcone at the proper height to mate
>> up to the horn, but I would like to hear if anyone else has used a
>> similar approach, and could send me a picture of the results.
>> Chris Hukill
>>
>> *
>>
>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>>
>
>
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: | Flare Fitting Torque |
On 4/28/11 2:03 PM, John Cox wrote:
> As a Tech Advisor, no one wants to hear from us how often we find flares
> on tubing incorrectly manufactured or improperly torqued (under and
> over)
I changed the subject line to start a new thread here.
Yes, this brought me back to reviewing what I need to do in the tunnel.
I wanted to put this info out there to make sure I am "doing it right".
In AC 43.13-1B CHG1 on page 9-19 there is a table for flare nut torque
values.
-4 nut = 50-65 inch pounds
-6 nut = 110-130 inch pounds
Also on page 7-8 of AC 43.13-1B there is a formula for determining the
correct torque reading when using adapters such as crows feet.
E - Distance from drive centerline to adapter centerline
T - Recommended torque value
L - Length or torque wrench, drive centerline to handle centerline
Y - What the wrench should be set at with adapter in place
TxL / L+E = Y
So for my wrench with a crows foot and to torque a -6 flare nut to 110
inch lbs works out like this...
110x10 / 10+1 = 100
My wrench should be set at 100 and *not* 110 in this case.
So, do I have all this right? A few questions..
1. I've seen different tables out there with different torque values
for the flare nuts. Is what I'm using above correct?
2. So the torque range for -4 above is 50-65. What do people use to
set their wrench? low end of 50? high end of 65? Split the difference
for 57?
2. There are some places in the tunnel where it just doesn't work
getting a torque wrench in there even with a crows foot and/or
extension. What are folks doing in this case?
-Sean #40303
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: Garmin XM weather |
I just tried the same argument with garmin about the 696 package cost and no luck.
Patrick Thyssen
n15pt
--- On Fri, 4/29/11, Shannon Hicks <civeng123@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Shannon Hicks <civeng123@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Garmin XM weather
The $700 one.
On Apr 28, 2011 9:17 PM, "Robin Marks" <robin@painttheweb.com> wrote:
> Shannon,
> On which subscription did you receive a 50% discount? And thanks for the
> tip.
>
> Robin
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Shannon Hicks <civeng123@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> When I called Garmin tech support yesterday, the prerecorded message stated
>> that the update was NOT mandatory for 696 users.
>>
>> BTW, I complained about the price of the updates in relation to the cost of
>> just purchasing an IPAD and using foreflight and they gave me a 50% discount
>> code for the yearly subscription!
>>
>> Shannon
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Miller John <gengrumpy@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> According to the download synopsis, it is all technical with XM weather
>>> transmission and has nothing to do with Jepp cycles.
>>>
>>> I glanced through the OS changes that scrolled by before doing the
>>> install. Once you complete the install, you cannot see those anymore.
>>>
>>> grumpy
>>>
>>> do not archive
>>>
>>> On Apr 28, 2011, at 2:22 PM, John Cox wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> > May 5th is the beginning of Jeppesen cycle 1105 which runs through June
>>> > 1. What might the connection be?
>>> >
>>> > John
>>> >
>>> > ----Original Message-----
>>> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>>> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Miller John
>>> > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 11:52 AM
>>> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>>> > Subject: RV10-List: Garmin XM weather
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > For those using Garmin XM weather, Garmin put out a notice for a
>>> > mandatory OS update.
>>> >
>>> > Garmin states that their XM weather units will no longer work after 5
>>> > May without the new update.
>>> >
>>> > grumpy
>>> > N184JM
>>> >
>>> > do not archive
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>>> ==========
>>> http://forums.matronics.com
>>> ==========
>>> le, List Admin.
>>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> ==========
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>>
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: Rudder gust lock |
I did something similar to Robin, but with the ' drop down' . One word
of caution, when I initially installed the gust lock, I installed it
only on one side, and I did not put 'retainer pins/clips' to hold in
place, During a trip, we experienced some extremely strong winds one
evening (40-50 mph gusts) and with the drop down retainer 'crept'
upward bit by bit until it allowed some movement in the rudder, and then
it progressively crept up until the movement was large enough to pull
the attachment bracket off the plane.
The solution for me, was to replicate the gust lock on 'Both' sides of
the rudder, and to add retaining clips to the drop in brackets that do
not allow for any 'creep'. The retainers are just some 3/16" ss rod bent
in a wide "U" and drilled for some retaining clips which are wired
together ( so as not to loose them) with a Remove before Flight flag.
It's rock solid now and haven't had any subsequent issues.
Attached is an early picture before I added the other side and snugged
up the retaining pins.
Deems
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: Garmin XM weather |
I just tried to update my Garmin 696 and they said that starting in 2011, I n
eed to have a SD card and a card reader for updates. No longer do you load d
irectly into the units. The good thing is they are providing it for free. T
he bad thing is I have to wait another week....
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 29, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Patrick Thyssen <jump2@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> I just tried the same argument with garmin about the 696 package cost and n
o luck.
> Patrick Thyssen
> n15pt
> --- On Fri, 4/29/11, Shannon Hicks <civeng123@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Shannon Hicks <civeng123@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Garmin XM weather
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Date: Friday, April 29, 2011, 6:52 AM
>
> The $700 one.
>
> On Apr 28, 2011 9:17 PM, "Robin Marks" <robin@painttheweb.com> wrote:
> > Shannon,
> > On which subscription did you receive a 50% discount? And thanks for the
> > tip.
> >
> > Robin
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Shannon Hicks <civeng123@gmail.com> wro
te:
> >
> >> When I called Garmin tech support yesterday, the prerecorded message st
ated
> >> that the update was NOT mandatory for 696 users.
> >>
> >> BTW, I complained about the price of the updates in relation to the cos
t of
> >> just purchasing an IPAD and using foreflight and they gave me a 50% dis
count
> >> code for the yearly subscription!
> >>
> >> Shannon
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Miller John <gengrumpy@aol.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> According to the download synopsis, it is all technical with XM weathe
r
> >>> transmission and has nothing to do with Jepp cycles.
> >>>
> >>> I glanced through the OS changes that scrolled by before doing the
> >>> install. Once you complete the install, you cannot see those anymore.
> >>>
> >>> grumpy
> >>>
> >>> do not archive
> >>>
> >>> On Apr 28, 2011, at 2:22 PM, John Cox wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > May 5th is the beginning of Jeppesen cycle 1105 which runs through J
une
> >>> > 1. What might the connection be?
> >>> >
> >>> > John
> >>> >
> >>> > ----Original Message-----
> >>> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> >>> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Miller Jo
hn
> >>> > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 11:52 AM
> >>> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> >>> > Subject: RV10-List: Garmin XM weather
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > For those using Garmin XM weather, Garmin put out a notice for a
> >>> > mandatory OS update.
> >>> >
> >>> > Garmin states that their XM weather units will no longer work after 5
> >>> > May without the new update.
> >>> >
> >>> > grumpy
> >>> > N184JM
> >>> >
> >>> > do not archive
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ==========
> >>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> >>> ==========
> >>> http://forums.matronics.com
> >>> ==========
> >>> le, List Admin.
> >>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> >>> ==========
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> *
> >>
> >> *
> >>
> >>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Garmin XM weather |
I just tried to update my Garmin 696 and they said that starting in 2011, I n
eed to have a SD card and a card reader for updates. No longer do you load d
irectly into the units. The good thing is they are providing it for free. T
he bad thing is I have to wait another week....
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 29, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Patrick Thyssen <jump2@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> I just tried the same argument with garmin about the 696 package cost and n
o luck.
> Patrick Thyssen
> n15pt
> --- On Fri, 4/29/11, Shannon Hicks <civeng123@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Shannon Hicks <civeng123@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: RV10-List: Garmin XM weather
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Date: Friday, April 29, 2011, 6:52 AM
>
> The $700 one.
>
> On Apr 28, 2011 9:17 PM, "Robin Marks" <robin@painttheweb.com> wrote:
> > Shannon,
> > On which subscription did you receive a 50% discount? And thanks for the
> > tip.
> >
> > Robin
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Shannon Hicks <civeng123@gmail.com> wro
te:
> >
> >> When I called Garmin tech support yesterday, the prerecorded message st
ated
> >> that the update was NOT mandatory for 696 users.
> >>
> >> BTW, I complained about the price of the updates in relation to the cos
t of
> >> just purchasing an IPAD and using foreflight and they gave me a 50% dis
count
> >> code for the yearly subscription!
> >>
> >> Shannon
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Miller John <gengrumpy@aol.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> According to the download synopsis, it is all technical with XM weathe
r
> >>> transmission and has nothing to do with Jepp cycles.
> >>>
> >>> I glanced through the OS changes that scrolled by before doing the
> >>> install. Once you complete the install, you cannot see those anymore.
> >>>
> >>> grumpy
> >>>
> >>> do not archive
> >>>
> >>> On Apr 28, 2011, at 2:22 PM, John Cox wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > May 5th is the beginning of Jeppesen cycle 1105 which runs through J
une
> >>> > 1. What might the connection be?
> >>> >
> >>> > John
> >>> >
> >>> > ----Original Message-----
> >>> > From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> >>> > [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Miller Jo
hn
> >>> > Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 11:52 AM
> >>> > To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> >>> > Subject: RV10-List: Garmin XM weather
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > For those using Garmin XM weather, Garmin put out a notice for a
> >>> > mandatory OS update.
> >>> >
> >>> > Garmin states that their XM weather units will no longer work after 5
> >>> > May without the new update.
> >>> >
> >>> > grumpy
> >>> > N184JM
> >>> >
> >>> > do not archive
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ==========
> >>> arget="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
> >>> ==========
> >>> http://forums.matronics.com
> >>> ==========
> >>> le, List Admin.
> >>> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> >>> ==========
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> *
> >>
> >> *
> >>
> >>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rudder gust lock |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
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: | Flare Fitting Torque |
Each builder is the Manufacturer (not VANS), many have happily followed
the mantra "just build it". Every builder receiving my Tech Inspection
hears the story of hats. On this list most of the readers are wearing
"The Builder/Manufacturer" hat. The moment the DAR is through with his
paperwork, you will learn the perspective of wearing "The Technician's"
hat. Often profanity follows and a dialog which goes something like
"Why didn't I think of that".
Access to an area, service loops, application of torque to any fitting
carrying fluids, support of electrical wires from chafing, they all play
into the dialog.
The reason for at least two tables are possibly the difference in B nut
construction between aluminum or steel. The proper use of a torque
wrench requires access, range of movement and proper application.
Hopefully the torque reading required is not at the lowest or highest
end of the measurement range. Both "under-torque" or more common "over
torque" lead to potential leaks and product failures. Every time you
open/loosen a fitting on a fluid line, you should pressurize, fly the
aircraft then reinspect for telltale signs. An improperly formed flare,
an over-torqued fitting, weak aluminum tubing or angular mis-match can
lead to potential leaks. Always remember to have the input or output
tubing with a bend to take up errors of using a straight run that can be
too short or too long.
Access to the tunnel whether from your favorite side or from the bottom
seem good points of consideration.
Think about what it will feel like when you re-enter a space for
servicing. Several of the readers have been great on the "I would have
done it this way, or I am thinking about changing" the product provided
or method suggested by a parts supplier.
AC 43.13 is only a baseline in the absence of one selected method or
standard by the responsible manufacturer. Often, such as with
electrical considerations, much has improved over the ideas of the
1940's - 50s techniques. Chose wisely.
In the absence of a standard in Experimental Built, Anything Goes. It's
an experiment. We are blessed with many somewhat similar aircraft in
reasonably similar construction.
On your torque calculation problem you did not mention if the 1" was
straight in line, at a 90 degree or some variant. Prop Hub bolts
provide a challenge.
John -#40600
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sean Stephens
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 8:06 AM
Subject: RV10-List: Flare Fitting Torque
On 4/28/11 2:03 PM, John Cox wrote:
> As a Tech Advisor, no one wants to hear from us how often we find
flares
> on tubing incorrectly manufactured or improperly torqued (under and
> over)
I changed the subject line to start a new thread here.
Yes, this brought me back to reviewing what I need to do in the tunnel.
I wanted to put this info out there to make sure I am "doing it right".
In AC 43.13-1B CHG1 on page 9-19 there is a table for flare nut torque
values.
-4 nut = 50-65 inch pounds
-6 nut = 110-130 inch pounds
Also on page 7-8 of AC 43.13-1B there is a formula for determining the
correct torque reading when using adapters such as crows feet.
E - Distance from drive centerline to adapter centerline
T - Recommended torque value
L - Length or torque wrench, drive centerline to handle centerline
Y - What the wrench should be set at with adapter in place
TxL / L+E = Y
So for my wrench with a crows foot and to torque a -6 flare nut to 110
inch lbs works out like this...
110x10 / 10+1 = 100
My wrench should be set at 100 and *not* 110 in this case.
So, do I have all this right? A few questions..
1. I've seen different tables out there with different torque values
for the flare nuts. Is what I'm using above correct?
2. So the torque range for -4 above is 50-65. What do people use to
set their wrench? low end of 50? high end of 65? Split the difference
for 57?
2. There are some places in the tunnel where it just doesn't work
getting a torque wrench in there even with a crows foot and/or
extension. What are folks doing in this case?
-Sean #40303
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: Flare Fitting Torque |
Perhaps a larger potential problem than torque values for B nuts , is
how to construct the proper flare. There are several different tools for
doing so, and the techniques of using the tools vary, It's quite
possible with at least one tool (Parker) to 'over torque' the flaring
tool and product a flare that becomes too thin and subject to breaking.
(Ask me how I know:-) ). Years ago I posted my experience of
'accidentally' finding that some fuel lines in the tunnel had been 'over
flared' and 'over torqued' and resulted in the flare breaking and the
line pulling free from the B nut! Fortunately I found it and redid all
of the alum lines, or I would have found myself in a similar situation
as Ted.
Deems
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: Flare Fitting Torque |
Sorry, yes the 1" is straight inline.
So if I understand correctly with the torque range, it's best to split
the difference as to be further away from both under and over torque.
The range numbers I gave were for Aluminum. Are the numbers below what
other builders are using? I'd like to "chose wisely" in this particular
case, but my choice is what the piece of paper tells me.
-4 nut = 50-65 inch pounds
-6 nut = 110-130 inch pounds
Thanks,
-Sean #40303
On 4/29/11 1:42 PM, John Cox wrote:
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "John Cox"<johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
>
> Each builder is the Manufacturer (not VANS), many have happily followed
> the mantra "just build it". Every builder receiving my Tech Inspection
> hears the story of hats. On this list most of the readers are wearing
> "The Builder/Manufacturer" hat. The moment the DAR is through with his
> paperwork, you will learn the perspective of wearing "The Technician's"
> hat. Often profanity follows and a dialog which goes something like
> "Why didn't I think of that".
>
> Access to an area, service loops, application of torque to any fitting
> carrying fluids, support of electrical wires from chafing, they all play
> into the dialog.
>
> The reason for at least two tables are possibly the difference in B nut
> construction between aluminum or steel. The proper use of a torque
> wrench requires access, range of movement and proper application.
> Hopefully the torque reading required is not at the lowest or highest
> end of the measurement range. Both "under-torque" or more common "over
> torque" lead to potential leaks and product failures. Every time you
> open/loosen a fitting on a fluid line, you should pressurize, fly the
> aircraft then reinspect for telltale signs. An improperly formed flare,
> an over-torqued fitting, weak aluminum tubing or angular mis-match can
> lead to potential leaks. Always remember to have the input or output
> tubing with a bend to take up errors of using a straight run that can be
> too short or too long.
>
> Access to the tunnel whether from your favorite side or from the bottom
> seem good points of consideration.
>
> Think about what it will feel like when you re-enter a space for
> servicing. Several of the readers have been great on the "I would have
> done it this way, or I am thinking about changing" the product provided
> or method suggested by a parts supplier.
>
> AC 43.13 is only a baseline in the absence of one selected method or
> standard by the responsible manufacturer. Often, such as with
> electrical considerations, much has improved over the ideas of the
> 1940's - 50s techniques. Chose wisely.
>
> In the absence of a standard in Experimental Built, Anything Goes. It's
> an experiment. We are blessed with many somewhat similar aircraft in
> reasonably similar construction.
>
> On your torque calculation problem you did not mention if the 1" was
> straight in line, at a 90 degree or some variant. Prop Hub bolts
> provide a challenge.
>
> John -#40600
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sean Stephens
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 8:06 AM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: Flare Fitting Torque
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: Sean Stephens<sean@stephensville.com>
>
> On 4/28/11 2:03 PM, John Cox wrote:
>> As a Tech Advisor, no one wants to hear from us how often we find
> flares
>> on tubing incorrectly manufactured or improperly torqued (under and
>> over)
> I changed the subject line to start a new thread here.
>
>
> Yes, this brought me back to reviewing what I need to do in the tunnel.
>
> I wanted to put this info out there to make sure I am "doing it right".
>
> In AC 43.13-1B CHG1 on page 9-19 there is a table for flare nut torque
> values.
>
> -4 nut = 50-65 inch pounds
> -6 nut = 110-130 inch pounds
>
> Also on page 7-8 of AC 43.13-1B there is a formula for determining the
> correct torque reading when using adapters such as crows feet.
>
> E - Distance from drive centerline to adapter centerline
> T - Recommended torque value
> L - Length or torque wrench, drive centerline to handle centerline
> Y - What the wrench should be set at with adapter in place
>
> TxL / L+E = Y
>
> So for my wrench with a crows foot and to torque a -6 flare nut to 110
> inch lbs works out like this...
>
> 110x10 / 10+1 = 100
>
> My wrench should be set at 100 and *not* 110 in this case.
>
> So, do I have all this right? A few questions..
>
> 1. I've seen different tables out there with different torque values
> for the flare nuts. Is what I'm using above correct?
>
> 2. So the torque range for -4 above is 50-65. What do people use to
> set their wrench? low end of 50? high end of 65? Split the difference
>
> for 57?
>
> 2. There are some places in the tunnel where it just doesn't work
> getting a torque wrench in there even with a crows foot and/or
> extension. What are folks doing in this case?
>
> -Sean #40303
>
>
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: Flare Fitting Torque |
This was one of my motivations for going to flex lines. At least
in that case you're going with lines that have no need to flare,
no worries about improper flares, no "learning curve" to getting
the right flare quality. I wanted my lines to be leak free
and work right out of the box...and the best way to do that is
to 1) eliminate as many connection points as you can, and 2) use
some pre-made lines. The quality of the tubing I had received
was also questionable...at times it would develop what was
kind of like galling and sometimes cracking, along what appeared
to be a grain in the metal somewhat. I ordered some additional
tubing from ACS and from Vans, and different batches of the same
material weren't as bad. So I never really fully trusted
the 3/8" lines that were produced from the material I got.
I'm still leery of the one going to the firewall...and would
love to change it out some day.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
On 4/29/2011 2:10 PM, Deems Davis wrote:
>
> Perhaps a larger potential problem than torque values for B nuts , is
> how to construct the proper flare. There are several different tools for
> doing so, and the techniques of using the tools vary, It's quite
> possible with at least one tool (Parker) to 'over torque' the flaring
> tool and product a flare that becomes too thin and subject to breaking.
> (Ask me how I know:-) ). Years ago I posted my experience of
> 'accidentally' finding that some fuel lines in the tunnel had been 'over
> flared' and 'over torqued' and resulted in the flare breaking and the
> line pulling free from the B nut! Fortunately I found it and redid all
> of the alum lines, or I would have found myself in a similar situation
> as Ted.
>
> Deems
>
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: Flare Fitting Torque |
instead of Van's supplied 3003-O. My 3003-O went in with my aluminum hvac scrap.
5052 has nearly twice the fatigue and tensile strength. 5052-O is used on certified
aircraft for a reason. As noted above it flares much nicer. I used Bonaco
flex hoses at the pedals and down the gear legs.
--------
Wayne Gillispie, A&P 5/93, PPC 10/08
Bldr# 40983 SB Started 12/1/09.
Fuselage Sec 46 Eng mount/Gear- 1359 hrs to date.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338482#338482
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: Flare Fitting Torque |
Improved product quality helps in the overall build. Getting rid of
H-5606 and upgrading hydraulic fluid is another Manufacturer decision.
Great call Wayne.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of rv10flyer
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 5:36 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: Flare Fitting Torque
instead of Van's supplied 3003-O. My 3003-O went in with my aluminum
hvac scrap.
5052 has nearly twice the fatigue and tensile strength. 5052-O is used
on certified aircraft for a reason. As noted above it flares much nicer.
I used Bonaco flex hoses at the pedals and down the gear legs.
--------
Wayne Gillispie, A&P 5/93, PPC 10/08
Bldr# 40983 SB Started 12/1/09.
Fuselage Sec 46 Eng mount/Gear- 1359 hrs to date.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=338482#338482
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! --
|