Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:05 AM - Re: Ram Air (Greg McFarlane)
2. 04:16 AM - Re: Re: Ram Air (Patrick Pulis)
3. 08:17 AM - Re: turf runways (johngoodman)
4. 08:27 AM - Re: Re: turf runways (Kelly McMullen)
5. 09:15 AM - Re: turf runways (johngoodman)
6. 01:40 PM - Re: Re: turf runways (Bill Watson)
7. 02:46 PM - Re: Re: turf runways (Cooprv7)
8. 09:32 PM - Re: Ram Air (woxofswa)
9. 09:44 PM - Re: Ram Air (rv10flyer)
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 |
|
Thanks Ben, The Snorkel is held with three screws (one each side one under) into
nut plates that are riveted onto three small pieces of ally. The wings of the
nut plates are bent to conform with the bent ally pieces which are then epoxied
and riveted into place. On my 6 I got away with only two screws but the 10
is somewhat larger. Cheers from Western Australia
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418170#418170
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_157.jpg
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 |
|
Greg
Many thanks. Does the scat tube inserted into the air filter fit permanently on
the lower cowl and then does that scat tube slide into the air filter when the
lower cowl is fitted?
If thus is the case, why is there a need for the front air scoop to be removable
please?
Your air inlet looks much larger than the standard, how much extra manifold pressure
gain due you anticipate?
Your modification appears to be a pseudo cold air induction. Well done.
Can I call you to discuss please?
Warm regards
Patrick
Tel: 08 8236 6808
Mob: 0418 850 156
> On 6 Feb 2014, at 20:34, "Greg McFarlane" <grbcmcfarlane@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks Ben, The Snorkel is held with three screws (one each side one under) into
nut plates that are riveted onto three small pieces of ally. The wings of
the nut plates are bent to conform with the bent ally pieces which are then epoxied
and riveted into place. On my 6 I got away with only two screws but the
10 is somewhat larger. Cheers from Western Australia
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418170#418170
>
>
>
>
> Attachments:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com//files/image_157.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: turf runways |
> Well, the Monster retreads do have a bigger diameter, but you can also add diameter
without the extra wt of the thicker Monster tread by using 6:00X6 tires
instead of the specified 15X^:00X6 tires Vans calls for. Or you could use 6:00X6
Monster retreads for a HiRider version.
Kelly brings up an interesting point. Since I am "pantless", Van's 15x6:00x6 tires
aren't necessary. I obviously could go with regular 6:00x6 tires and get an
inch higher up for less money. However, that means the nose tire needs a little
"bump up" as well. The nose wheel has limitations due to the size of the fork.
How would you deal with that?
John
--------
#40572 Phase One complete and flying.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418191#418191
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: turf runways |
Why would you need a bigger front tire? Bigger means more weight and
consequently more wear on nose fork even if it fit. Maybe the pivot for the
fork could be extended to raise the nose. If more prop clearance is needed,
perhaps a 3 blade with a little shorter blades would do the trick. I don't
think there is any significance to the slight change in angle of attack if
the mains are an inch taller, since you will lift the nose as soon as wings
and tail generate some lift.
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:16 AM, johngoodman <johngoodman@earthlink.net>wrote:
>
>
> > Well, the Monster retreads do have a bigger diameter, but you can also
> add diameter without the extra wt of the thicker Monster tread by using
> 6:00X6 tires instead of the specified 15X^:00X6 tires Vans calls for. Or
> you could use 6:00X6 Monster retreads for a HiRider version.
>
>
> Kelly brings up an interesting point. Since I am "pantless", Van's
> 15x6:00x6 tires aren't necessary. I obviously could go with regular 6:00x6
> tires and get an inch higher up for less money. However, that means the
> nose tire needs a little "bump up" as well. The nose wheel has limitations
> due to the size of the fork. How would you deal with that?
>
> John
>
> --------
> #40572 Phase One complete and flying.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418191#418191
>
>
--
- sent from the microchip implanted in my forearm
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: turf runways |
> Why would you need a bigger front tire? Bigger means more weight and consequently
more wear on nose fork even if it fit. Maybe the pivot for the fork could
be extended to raise the nose. If more prop clearance is needed, perhaps a 3
blade with a little shorter blades would do the trick. I don't think there is
any significance to the slight change in angle of attack if the mains are an inch
taller, since you will lift the nose as soon as wings and tail generate some
lift.
I only brought it up because there would be a tiny change in attitude on the ground.
Probably not significant, but nose down for sure. Would it be noticeable?
Probably not.
It just seems logical that a larger main tire, would suggest a larger nose tire,
as well. but I'm no expert.
I've flown in and out of grass strips, and it's not a problem. But, it gets a little
creepy taxiing on grass off the runway - always thinking of gopher holes....
John
--------
#40572 Phase One complete and flying.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418196#418196
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: turf runways |
I now have 400 hours operating out of the lit turf at 8NC8 in Durham
NC. Our field is considered 'rough'. I didn't do anything special
with my pants beyond the standard stuff for a build of my vintage
(finished Aug 2011). I did leave a healthy margin around the tires but
my pants are still too low for many airport's chocks and they still look
like they fully enclose the tire.
How rough? I found a cracked nose wheel during my last condition
inspection: Photo of cracked nosewheel
<http://www.mykitlog.com/users/display_log.php?user=MauleDriver&project=224&category=7984&log=180210&row=3>
I can honestly say that I've never even come close to any kind of nose
first or 3 point touchdown so I think this was from just normal wear and
tear on our turf.
The pants are showing some wear but are holding up just fine. My sense
is that long grass only stains the pants. You have to hit something to
damage them. I've never witnessed a landing of a '10 on my turf so I
can't speak to how it sounds or looks.
I did just crack a wheel pant when I got a flat tire in Pompano Beach.
My ten had been moved from tie down to front of the ramp for a morning
departure. It didn't have flat then since they managed to get chocks
under the pant but when it went flat, my pant was cracked front and
back. Fortunately I was able to continue on once the flat was fixed and
I'm glad it happened there instead of one of the airports I went to in
the Bahamas(!!).
Forty hours earlier I had swapped tires left and right for wear and
replaced the tubes with leak guards. I didn't get a chance to inspect
the tube so I can only guess what happened. There was quite a bit of
construction going on at KPMP and I had to taxi in areas shared with
construction equipment. I didn't have the flat when I landed.
I've landed my old Maule at Triple Tree. That is a smooooooth field,
especially where they fly models.
Anyway, that's the only damage I've really experienced despite operating
regularly out of a rough field. The pants do just fine.
Bill "it's pretty damn good in the Bahamas" Watson
On 1/27/2014 8:33 PM, rv10flyer wrote:
>
> I have flown into SC00 Triple Tree SC twice. We sat watching everyones pants
shake like crazy and that runway is supposedly golf course smooth. If I lived
on a grass strip I would beef up wheel pant mounts(switch to stainless) and fiberglass
or just remove them.
>
> Maybe we will hear from Bill "Living the life in an airpark with turf" Watson.
He might have to put some snow skis on this week.
>
> --------
> Wayne G.
>
>
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: turf runways |
Thanks Bill,
It's good to see all the positive turf runway reports. If you get a cha
nce, I'm sure we would all benefit from a trip report on your Bahama experie
nce.
Thanks again,
Marcus
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 6, 2014, at 16:38, Bill Watson <Mauledriver@nc.rr.com> wrote:
I now have 400 hours operating out of the lit turf at 8NC8 in Durham NC. O
ur field is considered 'rough'. I didn't do anything special with my pants b
eyond the standard stuff for a build of my vintage (finished Aug 2011). I d
id leave a healthy margin around the tires but my pants are still too low fo
r many airport's chocks and they still look like they fully enclose the tire
.
How rough? I found a cracked nose wheel during my last condition inspection
: Photo of cracked nosewheel
I can honestly say that I've never even come close to any kind of nose first
or 3 point touchdown so I think this was from just normal wear and tear on o
ur turf.
The pants are showing some wear but are holding up just fine. My sense is t
hat long grass only stains the pants. You have to hit something to damage t
hem. I've never witnessed a landing of a '10 on my turf so I can't speak t
o how it sounds or looks.
I did just crack a wheel pant when I got a flat tire in Pompano Beach. My t
en had been moved from tie down to front of the ramp for a morning departure
. It didn't have flat then since they managed to get chocks under the pant b
ut when it went flat, my pant was cracked front and back. Fortunately I was
able to continue on once the flat was fixed and I'm glad it happened there i
nstead of one of the airports I went to in the Bahamas(!!).
Forty hours earlier I had swapped tires left and right for wear and replaced
the tubes with leak guards. I didn't get a chance to inspect the tube so I
can only guess what happened. There was quite a bit of construction going o
n at KPMP and I had to taxi in areas shared with construction equipment. I d
idn't have the flat when I landed.
I've landed my old Maule at Triple Tree. That is a smooooooth field, especi
ally where they fly models.
Anyway, that's the only damage I've really experienced despite operating reg
ularly out of a rough field. The pants do just fine.
Bill "it's pretty damn good in the Bahamas" Watson
> On 1/27/2014 8:33 PM, rv10flyer wrote:
>
> I have flown into SC00 Triple Tree SC twice. We sat watching everyones pan
ts shake like crazy and that runway is supposedly golf course smooth. If I l
ived on a grass strip I would beef up wheel pant mounts(switch to stainless)
and fiberglass or just remove them.
>
> Maybe we will hear from Bill "Living the life in an airpark with turf" Wat
son. He might have to put some snow skis on this week.
>
> --------
> Wayne G.
>
>
==========================
========
==========================
========
==========================
========
==========================
========
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 |
|
I'm not an engineer, but I recall reading about the development of NACA vent designs
about how a protrusion around an intake can cause a damming or even vacuum
effect when not pointed directly into the airstream, (such as a slip or crosswind
gust. Not trying to be alarmist but I would at least run the concept
by an expert.
--------
Myron Nelson
Mesa, AZ
Emp completed, QB wings completed, legacy build fuse on gear. FWF complete.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418256#418256
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 |
|
When the SCAT is compressed 1.5", does it leave an aerodynamically smooth bore?
My stock lower cowl binds up more due to cooling air inlet ramp rubber seals
and only leaving 1/8" between spinner/cowl. Engine intake seems to be the easier
of the three difficult areas on mine during installation.
--------
Wayne G.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=418257#418257
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! --
|