Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:34 AM - Re: Side Slipping (DellAngelo, Scott M)
2. 01:32 AM - Aerobatic, to be or not to be (jc@INFONET.COM.BR)
3. 04:19 AM - Re: Aerobatic, to be or not to be (Sportypilot)
4. 05:19 AM - C&S speed X fixed pitch prop (jc@INFONET.COM.BR)
5. 06:30 AM - Re: C&S speed X fixed pitch prop (Sportypilot)
6. 08:15 AM - Re: Re:Side Sliping (Albert Gardner)
7. 09:18 AM - Re: Re: Side Slipping (John Disher)
8. 09:21 AM - Re:Side Sliping (rontyler)
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: Side Slipping |
0.15 HTML_TEXT_AFTER_BODY BODY": rv9-list@matronics.com
--> RV9-List message posted by: "DellAngelo, Scott M" <SDellAngelo@usg.com>
It's not the maneuvers that rip wings off airplanes, it's the g's.
Flip, roll, tumble, loop, whatever while pulling less than +4.4 and
it'll do fine. If you want to do aerobatics then build an RV of any
number less than a 9. I once rode in a Pitts S-2B with a very competent
pilot and we did ALL kinds of wild stuff while only pulling about 5 g's.
More than one RV9 has done a loop. Kevin Shannon did when he built his
and a picture in the vansairforce website shows that Cameron K (forget
the full last name) must have in his too.
The RV-9 has thinner wing skins and longer wings, those are two of the
obvious reasons that it would not handle as much. +4.4 is better rated
than your average Cessna, Piper, etc. Most are normal category at +3.8.
If you have never been exposed to real g's, 4.4 is getting pretty
serious. In the Pitts we barely made it to 5 and only once, and that
was enough to get me feeling not so good.
Scott
#90598 Firewall Forward
N598SD reserved
Plainfield, IL
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: | Aerobatic, to be or not to be |
--> RV9-List message posted by: jc@infonet.com.br
Hi there:
Just to remember, the turbulence create great G forces in an airplane.
An aerobatic aiplane supports G forces up to 9s like an EXTRA-300.
A normal or utility category is about 3,8 and an -9 is 4,4.
To make a good looping maneuver we must imput something around 3 Gs in an airplane.
Could imagine what will happen if the turbulence add more 3 Gs in a -9A during
the end
of a looping maneuver?
Go to -7 in order to do aerobatics.
The -9 is a wonderfull travelling machine.
JC - Aracaju - Brasil
-9A
flying/travelling
PU-JCI
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: Aerobatic, to be or not to be |
--> RV9-List message posted by: "Sportypilot" <sportypilot@stx.rr.com>
I know, I was just messing with you.. I don't have any plans on that, I
still need to learn to take off and land :)
so I won't be doing my 1st flight, wish I could but its not going to happen,
I have not heard of anyone doing a roll before
in a 9 or 9a, and I asked once about that just for the sake of discussion
and got beat up pretty good so I never asked again.. so
for the record, I am firewall forward on my 9a project, (finnishing up
building the 0320 engine with a 30 year a&p help) If I wanted
to do inverted spins I would have built something else, I just didn't know
what created 2g's or 3g's infact I have never hung around and
airport or have no friends that fly so I have alot to learn! but i do know
the 9a is what I wanted to build and that holds true today as well..
do not archive
Danny..
----- Original Message -----
From: <jc@INFONET.COM.BR>
Subject: RV9-List: Aerobatic, to be or not to be
> --> RV9-List message posted by: jc@infonet.com.br
>
> Hi there:
> Just to remember, the turbulence create great G forces in an airplane.
> An aerobatic aiplane supports G forces up to 9s like an EXTRA-300.
> A normal or utility category is about 3,8 and an -9 is 4,4.
> To make a good looping maneuver we must imput something around 3 Gs in an
> airplane.
> Could imagine what will happen if the turbulence add more 3 Gs in a -9A
> during the end
> of a looping maneuver?
> Go to -7 in order to do aerobatics.
>
> The -9 is a wonderfull travelling machine.
>
> JC - Aracaju - Brasil
> -9A
> flying/travelling
> PU-JCI
>
>
>
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: | C&S speed X fixed pitch prop |
--> RV9-List message posted by: jc@infonet.com.br
Danny:
My -9 is flying with a beatifull fixed pitch three blade CATTO prop. But at 10.000
to
12.000 feet (due to high clouds) I felt the necessity of a variable pitch prop.
At the
time I was working in a firewall forward Ive never think about to spend some more
US$
and install a governor, cables and all of the stuff to upgrade to a C&S prop.
May be its your time now to think about it. Isnt it?
JC - Aracaju - Brasil
-9A
PU-JCI
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: C&S speed X fixed pitch prop |
--> RV9-List message posted by: "Sportypilot" <sportypilot@stx.rr.com>
Yes I have thought alot about that over the last few weeks, my engine has
the rear plug removed (so it will be easier to install solid plug later
without
opening the engine case) I just can't afford it at this time, I need to get
this thing painted and flying to the airport (out of my garage because my
new corvette is sitting outside next to my porsche 911 ) so my funds are set
for the duel dynon D100 EFIS&EIS garmin 396 , SL40 com & 330 transsponder,
trio autopilot, future upgrades will be the alt hold, I am going to wait on
the prop till the last thing as I need to learn to fly 1st and my engine
will be low compression 150hp if its not enough then down the road I will
derate a 180 hp motor with a constant speed prop and it will give me
something to look forward too besides building an RV8A.. I need attainable
short term goals (getting over a divorce) with a future of moving up.. If I
had everything
top notch now then what would I have to look forward too. ? <huge grin>
ps: are you selling the Catto ? I like those too..
Danny..
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: <jc@INFONET.COM.BR>
Subject: RV9-List: C&S speed X fixed pitch prop
> --> RV9-List message posted by: jc@infonet.com.br
>
> Danny:
> My -9 is flying with a beatifull fixed pitch three blade CATTO prop. But
> at 10.000 to
> 12.000 feet (due to high clouds) I felt the necessity of a variable pitch
> prop. At the
> time I was working in a firewall forward Ive never think about to spend
> some more US$
> and install a governor, cables and all of the stuff to upgrade to a C&S
> prop.
> May be its your time now to think about it. Isnt it?
>
> JC - Aracaju - Brasil
> -9A
> PU-JCI
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> RV9-List message posted by: "Albert Gardner" <ibspud@adelphia.net>
Ron, when you get the "9" kit, replace (almost) all of the parts with those
from a "7" kit and you will be fully aerobatic. Seriously, you can't make
the RV-9(a) aerobatic. When I'm letting down into KYUM and airspeed is near
the yellow arc, I always find a few bumps and at that moment, an image of
the wing spar/center spar attachment pops into my head. I always pull off a
little power at that point. This plane flies well, lands great and - at even
at today's gas prices - is fairly cheap to fly.
Albert Gardner
RV-9A N872RV 580 hrs, 21 states, Baja, and Oshkosh twice.
Yuma, AZ
Howdy, New to the list.
Secondly, I understand that the -9 is not fully
aerobatically rated.
My assumption is the longer wingspan. Is there anything
else? Is there
anything a person could reasonably do during the building
process to
bring it up to aerobatic standards?
Regards, Ron Tyler
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: Side Slipping |
--> RV9-List message posted by: "John Disher" <jdisher@intergate.com>
I have to wonder if that little stubby main spar with such a short overlap
area isn't a good bit weaker too.
John Disher
still chasing wheel pants around
-------Original Message-------
From: DellAngelo, Scott M
Subject: RV9-List: Re: Side Slipping
--> RV9-List message posted by: "DellAngelo, Scott M" <SDellAngelo@usg.com>
It's not the maneuvers that rip wings off airplanes, it's the g's.
Flip, roll, tumble, loop, whatever while pulling less than +4.4 and
it'll do fine. If you want to do aerobatics then build an RV of any
number less than a 9. I once rode in a Pitts S-2B with a very competent
pilot and we did ALL kinds of wild stuff while only pulling about 5 g's.
More than one RV9 has done a loop. Kevin Shannon did when he built his
and a picture in the vansairforce website shows that Cameron K (forget
the full last name) must have in his too.
The RV-9 has thinner wing skins and longer wings, those are two of the
obvious reasons that it would not handle as much. +4.4 is better rated
than your average Cessna, Piper, etc. Most are normal category at +3.8.
If you have never been exposed to real g's, 4.4 is getting pretty
serious. In the Pitts we barely made it to 5 and only once, and that
was enough to get me feeling not so good.
Scott
#90598 Firewall Forward
N598SD reserved
Plainfield, IL
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 |
|
--> RV9-List message posted by: rontyler <rontyler@earthlink.net>
On Sep 19, 2005, at 8:13 AM, Albert Gardner wrote:
> --> RV9-List message posted by: "Albert Gardner" <ibspud@adelphia.net>
>
> Ron, when you get the "9" kit, replace (almost) all of the parts with
> those
> from a "7" kit and you will be fully aerobatic. Seriously, you can't
> make
> the RV-9(a) aerobatic.
Thanks everyone for your replies!
I am really torn between the -7 and -9... sigh.
Regards, Ron Tyler
"Enjoy being here while getting there."
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! --
|