From tedd at vansairforce.org Sun Sep 23 16:06:59 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:11 2005 Subject: [Wing] Test Message Message-ID: <20010923230700.PJLU26571.priv-edtnes04-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> This is a test message to the Western Canada Wing listserver, sent by the list administrator, 23 SEP 01 16:06 PDT. From tedd at vansairforce.org Sun Sep 23 16:12:34 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:11 2005 Subject: [Wing] Test 01/09/23/16:11 Message-ID: <20010923231234.BECM140.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> Test message sent by administrator at 01/09/23/16:11 PDT. From tedd at vansairforce.org Sun Sep 23 16:29:08 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:11 2005 Subject: [Wing] Test Attachment 01/09/23/16:25 PDT Message-ID: <20010923232909.BNMC140.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> Test message with attachment, sent by administrator 01/09/23/16:25 PDT. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 203594 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20010923/7723bbbc/attachment.gif From tedd at vansairforce.org Sun Sep 23 16:41:11 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:11 2005 Subject: [Wing] Test Attachment 01/09/23/16:39 Message-ID: <20010923234112.PLKU26571.priv-edtnes04-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> Test message with attachment, sent by administrator at 01/09/23/16:39 PDT. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 203594 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20010923/723d988e/attachment.gif From tedd at vansairforce.org Sun Sep 23 22:28:49 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:11 2005 Subject: [Wing] Welcome to Resubscribers Message-ID: <20010924052849.HRHA790.priv-edtnes10-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> I just wanted to send a short note to the first group of resubscribers, to thank you for signing up for the new listserver. We have ten resubscribers already, and it's only been a few hours since I announced the new list. Those of you who selected the "digest" option will probably get a message tonight that contains four or five test messages I sent when the listserver was first configured. You can safely delete it, it doesn't contain anything remotely interesting. Sorry for the spam. Feel free to start using the listserver. Just address you message to wing@vansairforce.org. Thanks, Tedd McHenry tedd@vansairforce.org From jlowenis at home.com Mon Sep 24 16:47:54 2001 From: jlowenis at home.com (John Owen) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:11 2005 Subject: [Wing] Thanks Message-ID: <002201c14553$55118c20$d74a4718@no.shawcable.net> Thanks Tedd for all the hard work. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20010924/ad49bca5/attachment.htm From tedd at vansairforce.org Tue Oct 9 20:34:42 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:11 2005 Subject: [Wing] Welcome to the New VAF Western Canada Wing Listserver Message-ID: <20011010032955.GZFL1369.priv-edtnes27-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> Wing Member: We have had quite a few new people sign up for the Wing email listserver since I installed the new software. I want to welcome everyone, especially those who have recently joined the Wing. Traffic on the new listserver has been slow so far. I'm going to attempt to "seed" a dialog by introducing myself, and inviting you to do the same. My name is Tedd McHenry, and I started the Western Canada Wing as a development of the now-defunct Western Canada RVator newsletter, which I took over from Ken Hoshowski in 1996. (By the way, back issues of the newsletter to 1996 are on the Wing web site in PDF format.) I live in Cloverdale, BC, and I'm building an RV-6. You can see pictures of my project at http://www.vansairforce.org/projects/Tedd_McHenry. I started flying in September, 1988, at the Canadian Forces flying training school in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba. I flew with the air force until September, 1994. I'm now "retired" from professional flying, and fly only as a hobby. I first became aware of RVs by reading the Recreational Flyer, back around 1985 or so. I attended Oskosh in 1986 along with my good friend Bob McCallum, who is a member of this list, a wannabe Falco builder, and the person who introduced me to the world of homebuilt aircraft. (I have tried without success to convert him to the RV religion.) At Oshkosh I saw the RV-6 for the first time. The -6 and the Mustang II were my two top choices of all the planes I saw at Oshkosh because they were sporty, side-by-side, and metal. I got my first RV ride in the spring of 1994, while I was a SAR Twin Otter pilot with 440 Squadron in Edmonton. I was doing an air display at the Redmond, OR airshow, and a local RV-4 pilot took me for a ride after the show. I was sold right there. The RV delivered exactly what I was looking for: the fun and fine handling of a Tutor in an all-metal kit I could afford. Okay, let's get political. Where do I stand on the RV "issues?" 1. I'm building a tail dragger with a tip-up canopy. Call me a traditionalist. 2. I'm using Sherwin-Williams 980 self-etching primer. So far I'm very pleased with the results. 3. As a former auto racer, I like auto engines and feel more comfortable with them than Lycomings. However, at the moment I feel there is only one auto engine in the 150-200 hp range that promises to match the power-to-weight ratio of a Lycoming at a reasonable cost, and that's the Mazda rotary. I do not consider the Subaru four-cylinders to be viable 150+ hp engines, even though I have great respect for them, having owned one. They're simply too small. There's still an outside possibility that I will put a rotary in my RV, but odds are I won't want to take the time required to engineer my own installation. However, that does not necessarily mean it'll be a Lycoming for me. I have the Jabiru order form sitting on my desk, and I have been giving a lot of thought to their new 180 hp engine. That's enough I-love-me for now. Once again, welcome to the list and feel free to post a message any time. Just send it to wing@vansairforce.org. Tedd McHenry From cliffada at telusplanet.net Wed Oct 10 18:06:17 2001 From: cliffada at telusplanet.net (Cliff Adams) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:11 2005 Subject: [Wing] Re Ted's Welcome Message-ID: <3BC4F089.46455C3C@telusplanet.net> My name is Cliff Adams. I live in Edmonton, teach highschool physics and biology and I've just started an RV7A...clecoed the HS skins last night as my first official act in what I think will be a 3 to 4 year project. I'm planning full IFR, 200HP, slider ...if I can talk Ralph Klein into giving me a raise... otherwise as some of you might know, teachers are getting a bit restive and looking for a decent raise so I may have two unplanned weeks in November just for building!...enough of politics...the RV7A is probably the best thing Van has put on the market so far. Pre-punched skins are ...well once you've played with them you will never want to go back to the other kind. This looks to be a treat for a project. I also have an RV6A tail assy almost completed but unmodifiable as an RV7 tail...this tail feathers set goes on hold until I can figure out what to do with it...perhaps make it a -6 as a second project for when I retire in a couple of years. My 83 year old father (still flying!) is helping mainly with advice and with some of the tools...he just happened to have a compressor... Dad is a pre-WW2 Canadian Airways tech (instrument shop) and the RCAF trained me as an I-Tech in 1960. Both Dad and I are Cessna Cardinal drivers but we haven't flown much lately. Enough for a start... I've never had a ride in an RV but I'm still grinnin' Cliff From rv7 at b4.ca Wed Oct 10 22:29:40 2001 From: rv7 at b4.ca (Rob Prior) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:11 2005 Subject: [Wing] Welcome to This is your life... 8-) References: <3BC4F089.46455C3C@telusplanet.net> Message-ID: <3BC52E44.C6FFD33@b4.ca> Well, since everyone else is doing it... My name is Rob Prior, and i'm an RV-oholic (cue chorus in background: "Hi, Rob!"). It took many years to get me to this point, during which I managed to amass a degree in Mechanical Engineering (specializing in Aeronautics of light aircraft), a private pilot's license, a spouse, and a house with a basement just big enough to build the tail and wing kits for an RV. What the heck, it's a start. Since I couldn't find a job in the aviation industry that allowed me to (a) work in the lower mainland of BC, (b) not ride a desk all day, and (c) not fly a bus all day, I get paid to work in the Printing Industry instead. It pays better than any job I could find working with light aircraft, and it's just as challenging and interesting as any engineering work i've ever done. In my spare time i'm one of the Directors, the Membership Chairman, and the webmaster (http://www.b4.ca/raa_85/) for Chapter 85 of the Recreational Aircraft Association of Canada. I'm also the BC Mainland National Director for the RAAC as well. Of course as homebuilders we're all members of RAAC, right? 8-) I count myself proud to be one of the two people out of 240 (last time I looked) that replied to the Vansairforce Yahoo forum's poll who fell into an age group of 30 or younger. Nothing like working against the odds. I'm also choosing a sliding canopy, a tailwheel, and electric trim, for those who are curious. Like Tedd I am considering the Jabiru engine, but want to see it myself before I actually decide on it. If it doesn't become viable, i'll be happy with a 160HP O-320. Yes, it's the smaller of the (lycoming) engines that the -7 will take, but it's also the more fuel efficient of the lot. With gas prices the way they are i'm not really keen on investing in an engine that will drain my pocket 25% faster for 5% faster cruise. I'm planning Night VFR instrumentation. I like the Dynon display, but would want a larger screen if at all possible, and Rocky Mountain makes nice engine instrumentation in a small package that i've seen used effectively on a few RV's in the area. Instrumentation is something i'm only likely to be using half the time i'm in the aircraft anyway, as the other half of the time i'll be flying #2 and keeping my eye on lead (Tedd, in his -6, with any luck 8-). As i'm only starting, there's not a lot there yet, but i've got a web page dedicated to the project, at http://www.b4.ca/rv7. The photos of the complete disassembled kits are kind of interesting, if you haven't seen them before. --------- Rob Prior rv7 "at" b4.ca ----------------------------- Stop dreaming... Start flying From acornyn at telusplanet.net Sat Oct 13 08:24:25 2001 From: acornyn at telusplanet.net (Alan Cornyn) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:11 2005 Subject: [Wing] Re Ted's Welcome References: <3BC4F089.46455C3C@telusplanet.net> Message-ID: <001101c153fb$25410780$f11ab8a1@yourname> If ever in Pincher Creek, I'll give you a ride. It won't be like a Cardinal. Rv-6 180 c/s Al at 403-627-3038 or 3538 ---- Original Message ----- From: Cliff Adams To: Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 7:06 PM Subject: [Wing] Re Ted's Welcome > My name is Cliff Adams. I live in Edmonton, teach highschool physics and > biology and I've just started an RV7A...clecoed the HS skins last night > as my first official act in what I think will be a 3 to 4 year project. > I'm planning full IFR, 200HP, slider ...if I can talk Ralph Klein into > giving me a raise... otherwise as some of you might know, teachers are > getting a bit restive and looking for a decent raise so I may have two > unplanned weeks in November just for building!...enough of > politics...the RV7A is probably the best thing Van has put on the market > so far. Pre-punched skins are ...well once you've played with them you > will never want to go back to the other kind. This looks to be a treat > for a project. I also have an RV6A tail assy almost completed but > unmodifiable as an RV7 tail...this tail feathers set goes on hold until > I can figure out what to do with it...perhaps make it a -6 as a second > project for when I retire in a couple of years. > > My 83 year old father (still flying!) is helping mainly with advice and > with some of the tools...he just happened to have a compressor... Dad is > a pre-WW2 Canadian Airways tech (instrument shop) and the RCAF trained > me as an I-Tech in 1960. > Both Dad and I are Cessna Cardinal drivers but we haven't flown much > lately. > > Enough for a start... I've never had a ride in an RV but I'm still > grinnin' > > Cliff > > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > From mdeg at shaw.ca Sat Oct 13 20:49:16 2001 From: mdeg at shaw.ca (Marc Degirolamo) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:11 2005 Subject: [Wing] hello fellow listers Message-ID: <008801c15463$32a5b2a0$05e64218@ss.shawcable.net> Hello......I'm Marc DeGirolamo from Saskatoon. I am a firefighter in Sasktoon, am married with three daughters. I have been flying since 1978 but have always been renting with the exception of owning a 172 for a short while. I figured that the only way I would have my own affordable airplane was to build one.....I was landing one day and this 'Homebuilt RV-4' was also in the circuit. I met the pilot, Lowell Johnson and managed to get a ride a week or so later (yes the 40K ride). That plane was soon sold to a fellow in England and Lowell was without an airplane also. I started building an RV-4 serial # 3289 with new partner Lowell Johnson in 1993. We worked slowly but steadily over the next seven years (we were both building families too). Although it sometimes seemed like the project would NEVER be done.......it flew July 7th, 2001 at CYXE 0700 hrs....after 7 years 6 months. (excerp from my building log.......we were doing high speed taxi testing) I glanced at the airseed indicator to verify that the needle was alive. When I looked up we were ten feet off the ground ! After overcontrolling for a few seconds I poured the coals on, commited to 'go flying'. I radioed tower that I was going to climb to 5500 ft and proceed north of the city, which we did. We flew over the Martinsville airport (just outside YXE control zone), and felt out the plane. I did some slow flight, turns,etc. while monitoring engine temps. After twenty minutes or so and feeling pretty good about controlling the plane, I started back to Saskatoon for landing. I set up the approach at 80 knots (slightly faster than I do now), over the fence at 75 and made an acceptable three point landing (small bounce)......... YA>>>>>HOOOOO !!! I can't believe I did that...........What a feeling it is to fly something which has taken almost eight years to complete. I made that first flight at least a thousand times in my mind but the feeling when our plane left the ground was incredible.......(ranks right up there with walking down the aisle, and watching my daughters being born..) Lessons learned: - if you make a mistake (and you will), fix it and move on - don't look at the big picture you'll get discouraged, focus on smaller easily attainable goals.... - keep at it ( work at it every day even if it is only for fifteen minutes) - the last 10 percent takes 90 percent of the time...... - it is definitely worth the wait.......:) - make absolutely sure that if you are doing high speed taxi test that both you AND the plane are ready for the first flight...!! C-FRVE: Engine: Lycoming 0320 E2D - 45 amp nippendenso alternator - vacuum pump - Vetterman crossover exhaust - lights, landing,nav and strobe Prop: Colin Walker 70 x 69 Avionics: Icom A 200 com - King Kt 76 transponder with blind encoder - Garmin 195 GPS Instruments: standard steam guages Paint: Endura.......White with red and blue markings Marc DeG......... mdeg@shaw.ca Ph: (306)934-4434 Fax(306) 934-4551 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011013/caefa54a/attachment.htm From BCwing at s4t.net Sun Oct 14 15:46:34 2001 From: BCwing at s4t.net (Rick McCraw) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Introduction and question Message-ID: Folks, I'm happy to follow your introductions with my own. My name is Rick McCraw. I'll start right out by saying that I'm not yet building an RV. After several years of careful (if periodic consideration), I've narrowed my incipient project down to either building an RV-7 or rebuilding a late 70's Skybolt. I haven't completely ruled out building the Pitts Model 12, either, but I'm presently more disposed to start my homebuilding experience with something a little less aggressive. More about this below. I've been a pilot since the mid-70's, since which time I've built up around 1,800 hours. It's 'most all been in singles or zeroes (sailplanes), with a major chunk of the time having been spent ferrying myself around on business. (I was a self-employed computer consultant for a quarter-century, but changed gears and now teach grades 5-8 in a public school.) My planes have included Skyhawks, a Skylane, a Cessna 210, and now an A-36 Bonanza. (Oh, and a Schleicher KA-6E sailplane.) Along the way I picked up the IFR ticket (also mid-70s), CFI and CFII (inactive), and glider commercial. The project is for me and for my son, who is 17 and heading to college next year. He'll start it with me, but I have no pretensions that we'll finish whatever it is before next September. More about the project quandary, which may get its own thread started: Although I'm a reasonably experienced pilot, I have no experience with mechanical stuff other than what one might do around the house. Everything else being equal, I'd rather build the RV-7 but would prefer to own and fly the Skybolt. This is no slam at all against the RV-7; I have every confidence that's it's a good and fine-flying airplane. However, knowing the way I'm apt to use it, I'd probably equip it for IFR, and it would likely end up as a mini-Bonanza. That's the problem: I'm not ready to sell the Bonanza, and I don't need two Bonanzas, one large and one small. The Skybolt strikes me as a great sportplane, and also a good (read: draggy) platform in which I can learn aerobatics, to which I've had very little exposure thus far. I've gotten a fair amount of input on this question so far, but can always use more. I don't suppose anyone out there has any opinions on the matter, ... ? Or that anyone might be biased toward RV's? :-) Thanks in advance. Rick P.S. I live in Vermont -- a long way from British Columbia. However, I love BC and Vancouver is one of my favorite places. If I were to live in any city, t'would be Vancouver. Vermont is a great place, but I sure wouldn't mind living in BC! (Haven't been to Alberta yet, but I'm looking forward to it someday.) From tedd at vansairforce.org Mon Oct 15 08:01:18 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Introduction and question Message-ID: <20011015150021.INHR1305.priv-edtnes15-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> Rick: >Although I'm a reasonably experienced pilot, I have no experience with >mechanical stuff other than what one might do around the house. I wouldn't worry too much about that if you decide to build the RV-7. Lots of RVs have been built by people with little previous experience in building things. One advantage of the RVs is that they are now so popular that you will likely be able to find other builders in your area who can help you out with the things you find difficult. >Everything >else being equal, I'd rather build the RV-7 but would prefer to own and fly >the Skybolt. It's important to think about what you want to build, not just what you want to own when it's done. There's a good change you'll spend more hours building your plane than you will flying it. So you want to be sure you enjoy the building process. That's one reason I wouldn't want to build a composite airplane. There are some great designs, but I hate working with the stuff. >However, knowing >the way I'm apt to use it, I'd probably equip it for IFR, and it would >likely end up as a mini-Bonanza. That's the problem: I'm not ready to sell >the Bonanza, and I don't need two Bonanzas, one large and one small. The >Skybolt strikes me as a great sportplane, and also a good (read: draggy) >platform in which I can learn aerobatics, to which I've had very little >exposure thus far. You're going about it the right way by considering the mission. If your Bonanza already gives you everything you want except aerobatics, and you don't want to sell it, then you probably should build something purely for aerobatics. That way you'll have the best of all worlds. On the other hand, you could sell the Bonanza, build an RV-7, and then buy something purely for aerobatics. >P.S. I live in Vermont -- a long way from British Columbia. However, I love >BC and Vancouver is one of my favorite places. If I were to live in any >city, t'would be Vancouver. Vermont is a great place, but I sure wouldn't >mind living in BC! (Haven't been to Alberta yet, but I'm looking forward to >it someday.) If you're ever in Vancouver, let me know. I'll introduce you to some of the local RV builders. Personally, I think you should build the RV-7, then fly it out here through Ontario, Manotoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and BC. Then you can have it all and see it all! Tedd From jjewell at telus.net Mon Oct 15 13:07:17 2001 From: jjewell at telus.net (jim jewell) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Introduction and question References: <20011015150021.INHR1305.priv-edtnes15-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> Message-ID: <000901c155b4$fd8dfde0$a7dcb440@bc.hsia.telus.net> Hi Rick, Then after visiting Vancouver and hanging out with all those rainforest people with webs between their toes and moss growing on their north sides, {;-)! you can head back inland to the beautiful Okanagan Valley area and find The real "Beautiful BC." There are several builders here also. that will happily show off their projects. Caution! staying here more than two weeks often leads to permanent resettlement and eventual retirement. Jim in Kelowna ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tedd McHenry" To: Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 8:01 AM Subject: Re: [Wing] Introduction and question > Rick: > > >Although I'm a reasonably experienced pilot, I have no experience with > >mechanical stuff other than what one might do around the house. > > I wouldn't worry too much about that if you decide to build the RV-7. Lots > of RVs have been built by people with little previous experience in building > things. One advantage of the RVs is that they are now so popular that you > will likely be able to find other builders in your area who can help you out > with the things you find difficult. > > >Everything > >else being equal, I'd rather build the RV-7 but would prefer to own and fly > >the Skybolt. > > It's important to think about what you want to build, not just what you want > to own when it's done. There's a good change you'll spend more hours > building your plane than you will flying it. So you want to be sure you > enjoy the building process. That's one reason I wouldn't want to build a > composite airplane. There are some great designs, but I hate working with > the stuff. > > >However, knowing > >the way I'm apt to use it, I'd probably equip it for IFR, and it would > >likely end up as a mini-Bonanza. That's the problem: I'm not ready to sell > >the Bonanza, and I don't need two Bonanzas, one large and one small. The > >Skybolt strikes me as a great sportplane, and also a good (read: draggy) > >platform in which I can learn aerobatics, to which I've had very little > >exposure thus far. > > You're going about it the right way by considering the mission. If your > Bonanza already gives you everything you want except aerobatics, and you > don't want to sell it, then you probably should build something purely for > aerobatics. That way you'll have the best of all worlds. On the other > hand, you could sell the Bonanza, build an RV-7, and then buy something > purely for aerobatics. > > >P.S. I live in Vermont -- a long way from British Columbia. However, I love > >BC and Vancouver is one of my favorite places. If I were to live in any > >city, t'would be Vancouver. Vermont is a great place, but I sure wouldn't > >mind living in BC! (Haven't been to Alberta yet, but I'm looking forward to > >it someday.) > > If you're ever in Vancouver, let me know. I'll introduce you to some of the > local RV builders. Personally, I think you should build the RV-7, then fly > it out here through Ontario, Manotoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and BC. Then > you can have it all and see it all! > > Tedd > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > From BCwing at s4t.net Mon Oct 15 16:14:51 2001 From: BCwing at s4t.net (Rick McCraw) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Introduction and question In-Reply-To: <20011015150021.INHR1305.priv-edtnes15-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> Message-ID: Jim and Tedd, Thanks for your comments. Should I find a way to get out in your direction, I'll surely look you both up -- maybe next summer. Frankly, I can very easily imagine retiring out in your direction; I've been a right-coast person most of my life, but I love the west. (And retirement isn't all _that_ far away, at least in principle.) All I need to do is get one of my kids to move out there in a few years... Do you folks routinely operate your RV's in IMC? I know Van's recommends only "light IFR" (or some such words) due to stability issues. How do you find your planes perform IFR in the real world? Rick Agonizing over choices From tedd at vansairforce.org Mon Oct 15 16:22:37 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Introduction and question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Rick: On Mon, 15 Oct 2001, Rick McCraw wrote: > > Do you folks routinely operate your RV's in IMC? I know Van's recommends > only "light IFR" (or some such words) due to stability issues. How do you > find your planes perform IFR in the real world? I can't answer your question about IFR in an RV, having never done it. IFR in homebuilts has only been legal in Canada for a few years, so there aren't very many people doing it yet. I don't know of anyone who flies an RV IFR up here, although I expect there are a few who do. When I first moved out to the coast a few years ago (from the prairies), I was worried that VFR would be very limited. As you may know, we have the reputation of getting a lot of rain here, and we have the mountains to complicate things. But I've discovered that there really isn't much rain here in the summer, so for half the year you can count on good VFR flying nearly every day. There is a lot of rain, or at least overcast, in the winter. But the air masses tend to be quite stable here. So if you have a 1,500 or 2,000 foot overcast--very common in the winter--you can be comfortable that it won't lower on you in a hurry. So long as you stay in the wide valleys, or out along the coast, VFR is usually fine. After three years of flying here, I've only scratched one flight for weather, and aborted another part way. I don't fly all that often, though. If you wanted to fly two or three times a week here, you'd probably find the winter somewhat restricting. I will probably only equip my -6 for day/night VFR. Tedd From kiwi at sunwave.net Sun Oct 21 09:01:48 2001 From: kiwi at sunwave.net (Barry Tunzelmann) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Barry Tunzelmann profile Message-ID: <01C15A0F.0518B880.kiwi@sunwave.net> I returned to New Zealand in 1984 to manage a large construction project and it was there that I learnt to fly. I flew various planes there as the Flying Club I belonged to had 14 planes on the line from aerobatic types (Slingsby's), Tomahawks, 172, Arrow, Cherokee 6, Warriors. I returned to Canada in 1987 and started flying the 172 exclusively and later progresed to a Mooney and a C210. This is where my desire to own came in and in 1994 I moved to Salmon Arm where I met Ken Hoshowski and Eustace Bowhay who had each, at that time, recently completed RV6's. I immediately liked this little hot rod and ordered my kit in July of 95. Been working on the darn thing ever since but the reason it has taken so long is because I had to build the shop that it is being built in, I am renovating a house and I work away from home all the time. I am fitting the cowling and the canopy is on and have taken up 1300 hours total so far. I can make a reasonable guess that unless something bad happens the plane should fly next summer (stop laughing Ken) as I will take the panel with me if I leave town again and build it wherever I am, along with the wiring loom for the plane. I am married to Cindy (she is the wife I had when the project started) have two children (adults) 20 and 19 and live on our vineyard acreage (what I did this summer) in Canoe, BC. I work as an electrical engineering tech and am a electrician from past days. That is why the wiring part is the least scary thing for me. Barry & Cindy Tunzelmann PH: (250) 832-3198 From BCwing at s4t.net Wed Oct 24 19:30:25 2001 From: BCwing at s4t.net (Rick McCraw) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Compressor -- good deal? Message-ID: Wing members, Although I'm not quite ready to commit to building an RV, I'm thinking ahead to useful shop equipment. I found the following on the Campbell-Hausfeld website. According to a half-hour or so of research on the Matronics RV archive, this device looks like it would be more than adequate, even for painting. And the price looks reasonable, again judging by the archives. I like the idea of cast iron, since I gather it would be more durable than steel, and my ears like the idea of oil-lubricated. Am I missing something here? (Wouldn't be the first time.) Thanks for your thoughts. Rick McCraw A-36 pilot, incipient RV builder (maybe) 6.5 HP, 60 Gallon ASME Vertical tank, Twin cylinder cast iron oil lubricated Factory-Serviced a.. Cast Iron twin cylinder oil lubricated pump - for long life and quiet operation b.. Made in the US - quality construction that you can count on c.. 10.2 CFM @ 90 PSI, Max 125 PSI d.. 60 Gallon ASME Vertical tank - saves space while providing lots of stored energy e.. 90-Day Warranty f.. Model VT6195RB A HOT BUY at $339.00 (Regular Price: $470.00) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011024/cd48d99c/attachment.htm From mdeg at shaw.ca Wed Oct 24 19:56:27 2001 From: mdeg at shaw.ca (Marc Degirolamo) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Compressor -- good deal? References: Message-ID: <000c01c15d00$a6f2d5c0$05e64218@ss.shawcable.net> Rick......I built my RV with a 2.5hp 20gal compressor.....but it would not have been suitable for painting. the one you are looking at should be able to handle all your needs for building...... Marc DeGirolamo RV-4.....C-FRVE 35hrs and still grinning ----- Original Message ----- From: Rick McCraw To: wing@vansairforce.org Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 8:30 PM Subject: [Wing] Compressor -- good deal? Wing members, Although I'm not quite ready to commit to building an RV, I'm thinking ahead to useful shop equipment. I found the following on the Campbell-Hausfeld website. According to a half-hour or so of research on the Matronics RV archive, this device looks like it would be more than adequate, even for painting. And the price looks reasonable, again judging by the archives. I like the idea of cast iron, since I gather it would be more durable than steel, and my ears like the idea of oil-lubricated. Am I missing something here? (Wouldn't be the first time.) Thanks for your thoughts. Rick McCraw A-36 pilot, incipient RV builder (maybe) 6.5 HP, 60 Gallon ASME Vertical tank, Twin cylinder cast iron oil lubricated Factory-Serviced a.. Cast Iron twin cylinder oil lubricated pump - for long life and quiet operation b.. Made in the US - quality construction that you can count on c.. 10.2 CFM @ 90 PSI, Max 125 PSI d.. 60 Gallon ASME Vertical tank - saves space while providing lots of stored energy e.. 90-Day Warranty f.. Model VT6195RB A HOT BUY at $339.00 (Regular Price: $470.00) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011024/f4784a3a/attachment.htm From tedd at vansairforce.org Wed Oct 24 20:05:41 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Compressor -- good deal? Message-ID: <20011025030346.DLJ27726.priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> Rick: I'm guessing that price ($339) is in U.S. dollars. At that price, I'd say it's a pretty good deal. (If it were Canadian dollars it would be an amazing deal.) My C-H 20-gallon compressor cost about CDN$350, or about US$225, a couple of years ago. It's also iron, single cylinder, and about 6 CFM @ 90 PSI. The model you're looking at will definitely give you all you need for an RV project, and then some. I definitely recommend iron cylinder(s) and oil lubrication. One thing I have found handy with my 20-gallon compressor is the portability. My project is part in the basement and part in my garage. I move the compressor back and forth quite often. But if you don't need to do that, a fixed compressor is fine, and you'll have a lot more capacity than I have. Tedd McHenry From Rob_Prior at CreoScitex.com Wed Oct 24 21:35:45 2001 From: Rob_Prior at CreoScitex.com (Rob Prior) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Compressor -- good deal? Message-ID: <66F336FF8FD0484B943E0CF48D923C2CBC2B4D@CSCEX04> FWIW, i'm another who went for the 20 Gal, 5hp (claimed) compressor from C-H (Model VS6231, $399 Canadian at Canadian Tire). I like the portability of it, but for now it'll sit pretty stationary until I get the wings completed. I have it connected inline with a spare 10-gal air tank that I had left over from a project at work, so in effect have 30gal of capacity in my system. Less compressor cycles should mean slightly happier neighbors... 8-). For anyone looking for a compressor in this size range, Home Depot is selling a Husky compressor that's 26 Gal, 5HP (claimed), that is made by C-H. It's essentially the VS6271 model, with red paint instead of blue, and I think it's about $399 as well. I considered buying one of the Factory Serviced models myself, but decided against it. You'll want to check into pricing local to where you live, but for me, here in the lower mainland of BC, it went like this: $269 US for Factory Serviced VS6231 (still advertised on the C-H website) x 1.5 for the exchange = $403.50 Canadian. I didn't even factor in the shipping cost, but regardless the price is already over Canadian Tire's catalog price of $399, and it wouldn't come with a three year warranty like the new ones do. So for the 60 Gal model you mention it'd be $339 US x 1.5 = $508.50 Canadian, plus shipping. Check around, you might find that the price locally isn't significantly more, and it would include a 3 year warranty. With oil lubrication and a cast iron cylinder, you're unlikely to need it for 20 years, much less 3, but... -Rob Prior rv7 "at" b4.ca RV-7 Empennage -----Original Message----- From: Rick McCraw [mailto:BCwing@s4t.net] Sent: October 24, 2001 19:30 To: wing@vansairforce.org Subject: [Wing] Compressor -- good deal? Wing members, Although I'm not quite ready to commit to building an RV, I'm thinking ahead to useful shop equipment. I found the following on the Campbell-Hausfeld website. According to a half-hour or so of research on the Matronics RV archive, this device looks like it would be more than adequate, even for painting. And the price looks reasonable, again judging by the archives. I like the idea of cast iron, since I gather it would be more durable than steel, and my ears like the idea of oil-lubricated. Am I missing something here? (Wouldn't be the first time.) Thanks for your thoughts. Rick McCraw A-36 pilot, incipient RV builder (maybe) 6.5 HP, 60 Gallon ASME Vertical tank, Twin cylinder cast iron oil lubricated Factory-Serviced * Cast Iron twin cylinder oil lubricated pump - for long life and quiet operation * Made in the US - quality construction that you can count on * 10.2 CFM @ 90 PSI, Max 125 PSI * 60 Gallon ASME Vertical tank - saves space while providing lots of stored energy * 90-Day Warranty * Model VT6195RB A HOT BUY at $339.00 (Regular Price: $470.00) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011024/97e42ed9/attachment.htm From tedd_mchenry at agilent.com Thu Oct 25 10:09:45 2001 From: tedd_mchenry at agilent.com (MCHENRY,TEDD (A-Canada,ex1)) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] RV List Web Browsing Feature Message-ID: Wing Members: Now that Matronics has adopted the RV List Web Browsing feature (http://www.matronics.com/listbrowse), I will remove the RV List In Basket from our web site (it is essentially the same thing). I encourage you to try RV List Web Browsing; it's a very convenient way to read RV List messages. Also, it allows you to "lurk" the list without having to join and receive messages by email. Tedd McHenry Van's Air Force Western Canada Wing www.vansairforce.org From nhunger at sprint.ca Sun Oct 28 21:24:49 2001 From: nhunger at sprint.ca (Norman) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Test Message-ID: <008f01c1603a$10fa66e0$1fe594d1@oemcomputer> Test from a new member. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011028/c07c3faa/attachment.htm From nhunger at sprint.ca Mon Oct 29 20:05:18 2001 From: nhunger at sprint.ca (Norman) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] New Member Selling RMI Monitor Message-ID: <004b01c160fa$78905560$fce394d1@oemcomputer> Hi folks, I just signed on although I used to be a member in the old format. Also riding the Matronics RV, Rocket, and AeroElectric lists. For internet mags I'm on http://www.avweb.com/ (twice a week) and http://www.aero-news.net/ (five time a week). I'm been building an RV6A for close to 6 years. I'm currently finishing the canopy, wiring, and upholstery. Nothing done forward of the firewall yet. Best case has me flying in a couple of years but I'm not in a hurry. I enjoy the building process and the fact that it keeps me home with my family. This month is complicated by a move to new digs. Otherwise I am a slow builder due to my job that has obscene amounts of overtime. I'm thinking of calling my ship "Overtime" as it's the only reason I'm able to finish it off as I am. Great fun. Looking forward to traveling with it and starting a SR-3500 ASAP. I plan on keeping it at ZBB but that will come down to what's available at the time. Anyhow, I have a Rocky Mountain Instrument Monitor kit for sale. I did the vast majority of the soldering while on holiday last summer. It was the easiest part of the kit to take along to the lake. I'm going to keep all the senders and stuff. I'd like to get $1000 Canadian for what is worth $999 USD and of course I have it landed here on the west coast of Canada. Of course it comes with no warranty. Please reply direct to nhunger@sprint.ca if interested. I give shop tours to anyone interested and if you are a complete beginner then I will do an afternoon training session on tools and riveting. I'll send you packing with scraps to practice with when we're done too. Regards, Norman Hunger RV6A Delta BC -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011029/ce50cbd2/attachment.htm From nhunger at sprint.ca Mon Oct 29 20:58:58 2001 From: nhunger at sprint.ca (Norman) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Panel Lighting Message-ID: <005a01c160ff$96f12e80$fce394d1@oemcomputer> I want to light my panel from the lip of my glairsheild which is five inches from the panel. It is an RV6 glairsheild that is untrimmed. I bough a few strip lights from JC Whitney http://www.jcwhitney.com/ bendable strip lights in white 20BB0457Y. $12 USD for 5'. When I tested them out in my darkened shop they weren't bright enough but I liked the format. I also didn't like the quality of wire that they are put together with. So I desoldered them and painstakingly soldered the bulbs onto some of my wire and made the bulbs as close together as I could. I shoved them back in the nifty white plastic strip and tested them out. They appear great, I'm almost positive they will do the job. They claim 40,000 hour bulb life. Recently I've been turned onto LED's from Ledtronics http://www.ledtronics.com/ . They make a strip light with low profile bulbs that are 1/2 inch apart PLT-210-OCW but the price is a whopping $96 a foot. I need around four feet so they're out. So now I notice that JC Whitney has Wolo LED light bars for dressing up a vehicle's exterior. $15 USD for 14 inches with 50 LEDs part number 15BB7505U. I wonder what color the bulbs are as the catalog only indicates the color of the lens in the casing. These might work well when stripped apart if the bulbs are white. Anyone care to try some thing new? Regards, Norman Hunger RV6A Delta BC From nhunger at sprint.ca Mon Oct 29 21:17:34 2001 From: nhunger at sprint.ca (Norman) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] SR3500 Message-ID: <006c01c16102$2f6d36c0$fce394d1@oemcomputer> Yes Rob, I would do an SR3500 in flush solid shank rivets just to make it special. I'd go with an IO-540 for power. Murphy claims it would not improve it much. They say the only real benefits are just at the wing leading edges. RV's have much more to gain with their higher cruise speeds. They also claim that their rivets achieve full strength with little skill required to set them where a solid shank rivet requires a fair amount of skill from the builder to achieve full strength. Hogwash, anyone can learn to rivet. I've done around 15,000 now so I feel confident to give it a go. How's Al Neufeld these days? I was his first student 12 years ago. Norman Hunger RV6A Delta BC -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011029/9fc1d94b/attachment.htm From jjewell at telus.net Mon Oct 29 23:02:49 2001 From: jjewell at telus.net (jim jewell) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] SR3500 References: <006c01c16102$2f6d36c0$fce394d1@oemcomputer> Message-ID: <001301c16110$e30967e0$a7dcb440@bc.hsia.telus.net> Hi Norman, How's life in down there in the rain forest where folks have webs between their toes and moss growing on their north sides? I'm sure you are not alone with the idea of building the Murphy with AN flush rivets. I'm fairly sure that an improvement due to reduced parasitic drag though slight, would be noticed. I think it would be interesting to compare the weight of a pulled pop rivet and compare that to an AN flush rivet of comparable application size. I'm certain that the pulled pop rivet with the little steel ball inside would weigh in heavier. Multiply the small single rivet difference buy the number used in the Murphy and apply that to the payload. Because of the tight spacing of the pop rivets in the Murphy design I'm convinced that fewer AN rivets could be used, again reducing the overall weight of the aircraft. I haven't got a scale suitable for the purpose its been a lot of years since I fooled around weighing grams. {;~)! Anyhow it would be an interesting experiment don't you think? I think I should get back to building, the next thing you know I'll start wondering why bug splats land on the backsides of propeller blades. Bye for now, Jim in Kelowna ----- Original Message ----- From: Norman To: wing@vansairforce.org Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 9:17 PM Subject: [Wing] SR3500 Yes Rob, I would do an SR3500 in flush solid shank rivets just to make it special. I'd go with an IO-540 for power. Murphy claims it would not improve it much. They say the only real benefits are just at the wing leading edges. RV's have much more to gain with their higher cruise speeds. They also claim that their rivets achieve full strength with little skill required to set them where a solid shank rivet requires a fair amount of skill from the builder to achieve full strength. Hogwash, anyone can learn to rivet. I've done around 15,000 now so I feel confident to give it a go. How's Al Neufeld these days? I was his first student 12 years ago. Norman Hunger RV6A Delta BC -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011029/10ba77cb/attachment.htm From jayeandscott at home.com Tue Oct 30 10:29:45 2001 From: jayeandscott at home.com (Jaye and Scott Jackson) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] SR3500 References: <006c01c16102$2f6d36c0$fce394d1@oemcomputer> <001301c16110$e30967e0$a7dcb440@bc.hsia.telus.net> Message-ID: <004d01c16170$d9c6cb40$0200a8c0@jayeandscott> I overheard in the coffeshop at ZBB last week that the newest Murphy demo plane ( the one with the radial?) is flush riveted. Couldn't get it confirmed though. Scott Do Not Archive ----- Original Message ----- From: jim jewell To: wing@vansairforce.org Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 11:02 PM Subject: Re: [Wing] SR3500 Hi Norman, How's life in down there in the rain forest where folks have webs between their toes and moss growing on their north sides? I'm sure you are not alone with the idea of building the Murphy with AN flush rivets. I'm fairly sure that an improvement due to reduced parasitic drag though slight, would be noticed. I think it would be interesting to compare the weight of a pulled pop rivet and compare that to an AN flush rivet of comparable application size. I'm certain that the pulled pop rivet with the little steel ball inside would weigh in heavier. Multiply the small single rivet difference buy the number used in the Murphy and apply that to the payload. Because of the tight spacing of the pop rivets in the Murphy design I'm convinced that fewer AN rivets could be used, again reducing the overall weight of the aircraft. I haven't got a scale suitable for the purpose its been a lot of years since I fooled around weighing grams. {;~)! Anyhow it would be an interesting experiment don't you think? I think I should get back to building, the next thing you know I'll start wondering why bug splats land on the backsides of propeller blades. Bye for now, Jim in Kelowna ----- Original Message ----- From: Norman To: wing@vansairforce.org Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 9:17 PM Subject: [Wing] SR3500 Yes Rob, I would do an SR3500 in flush solid shank rivets just to make it special. I'd go with an IO-540 for power. Murphy claims it would not improve it much. They say the only real benefits are just at the wing leading edges. RV's have much more to gain with their higher cruise speeds. They also claim that their rivets achieve full strength with little skill required to set them where a solid shank rivet requires a fair amount of skill from the builder to achieve full strength. Hogwash, anyone can learn to rivet. I've done around 15,000 now so I feel confident to give it a go. How's Al Neufeld these days? I was his first student 12 years ago. Norman Hunger RV6A Delta BC -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011030/07f77ea6/attachment.htm From tedd_mchenry at agilent.com Tue Oct 30 10:38:31 2001 From: tedd_mchenry at agilent.com (MCHENRY,TEDD (A-Canada,ex1)) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] SR3500 Message-ID: > I overheard in the coffeshop at ZBB last week that the newest Murphy > demo plane ( the one with the radial?) is flush riveted. Couldn't get > it confirmed though. > Scott Darn! I was looking at it a week ago on the ramp at Chilliwack, but I didn't notice. It looks good with the radial, though. I understand you can now get the "B" model or the radial, which is non-aerobatic, but cheaper. Hey, is it just me or is this rapidly becoming the Murphy List? (Not complaining--I like the Rebel too.) Tedd McHenry Surrey, BC From Rob_Prior at CreoScitex.com Tue Oct 30 18:09:29 2001 From: Rob_Prior at CreoScitex.com (Rob Prior) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] SR3500 Message-ID: <66F336FF8FD0484B943E0CF48D923C2CBC2B76@CSCEX04> Yes, diverging further from our core topic of RV-s, but... 8-) FWIW, I think the Radial-engined Murphy still needs work. I looked at it on the ramp at YCW a week or so ago (but didn't notice if it was hard- or pop-riveted), and it still looks like there's work to be done to it. The radial engine sticks down so far below the fuselage that it just begs for a belly pod or lowered bottom skin to make it smooth. The nice lines of the airplane are seriously compromised, IMHO. But you can't argue with the nice rumble that a radial makes... 8-) -RB4 -----Original Message----- From: MCHENRY,TEDD (A-Canada,ex1) [mailto:tedd_mchenry@agilent.com] Sent: October 30, 2001 10:39 To: 'wing@vansairforce.org' Subject: RE: [Wing] SR3500 > I overheard in the coffeshop at ZBB last week that the newest Murphy > demo plane ( the one with the radial?) is flush riveted. Couldn't get > it confirmed though. > Scott Darn! I was looking at it a week ago on the ramp at Chilliwack, but I didn't notice. It looks good with the radial, though. I understand you can now get the "B" model or the radial, which is non-aerobatic, but cheaper. Hey, is it just me or is this rapidly becoming the Murphy List? (Not complaining--I like the Rebel too.) Tedd McHenry Surrey, BC _______________________________________________ Wing mailing list Wing@vansairforce.org http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing From nhunger at sprint.ca Wed Oct 31 02:04:55 2001 From: nhunger at sprint.ca (Norman) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] SR3500 References: <006c01c16102$2f6d36c0$fce394d1@oemcomputer> <001301c16110$e30967e0$a7dcb440@bc.hsia.telus.net> <004d01c16170$d9c6cb40$0200a8c0@jayeandscott> Message-ID: <001c01c161f3$7ee700e0$09e694d1@oemcomputer> >>I overheard in the coffeshop at ZBB last week that the newest >> Murphy demo plane ( the one with the radial?) is flush riveted. >> Couldn't get it confirmed though. I thought they were offering it as an option for the leading edges only. As for a Rebel List Tedd, it sure is nice to have a local product so good. What do you guys think of the CH801? Both would make great floatplanes. I used to think the ideal aircraft was on amphibian floats but I had a chance to fly a C185 on amphibs last summer and I hated it. It was a bear in the water, and I never did put anyone in the back seat. I've heard the commercial operators slam them for years and now I understand why. Also, one little gear problem and you are upside down and very wet. If I did either I would do it with flush solid shank rivets. No takers on the Rocky Mountain engine monitor? I'll wait to the weekend then post it to Matronics. Regards, Norman Hunger -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011031/4cdb9602/attachment.htm From Rob_Prior at CreoScitex.com Wed Oct 31 09:20:23 2001 From: Rob_Prior at CreoScitex.com (Rob Prior) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] SR3500 Message-ID: <66F336FF8FD0484B943E0CF48D923C2CBC2B7D@CSCEX04> Murphy has always said that if you *really* want to flush rivet a Rebel, you can go ahead and do it. But don't expect it to be easier to build or faster once it's done. I think the only real benefit would be to the looks, you could have a really smooth airplane. As for the CH801, here's my opinion (you asked for it). While Chris Heintz is a good engineer who can come up with amazingly simple designs that are 100% effective, his aircraft look like someone slapped together whatever leftover parts were sitting around a drunk metalworker's shop. They're UUUUUUUUUUUUGLY! I can't argue with the fact that they meet the mission profile for which they were designed, but I would never build or own one. The reason they fly so well has to be as much that the earth repels them as it is that they actually fly on their own merits. This may sound like a harsh opinion, but i'm from the school that says that good engineering doesn't have to be ugly... -RB4 -----Original Message----- From: Norman [mailto:nhunger@sprint.ca] Sent: October 31, 2001 02:05 To: wing@vansairforce.org Subject: Re: [Wing] SR3500 >>I overheard in the coffeshop at ZBB last week that the newest >> Murphy demo plane ( the one with the radial?) is flush riveted. >> Couldn't get it confirmed though. I thought they were offering it as an option for the leading edges only. As for a Rebel List Tedd, it sure is nice to have a local product so good. What do you guys think of the CH801? Both would make great floatplanes. I used to think the ideal aircraft was on amphibian floats but I had a chance to fly a C185 on amphibs last summer and I hated it. It was a bear in the water, and I never did put anyone in the back seat. I've heard the commercial operators slam them for years and now I understand why. Also, one little gear problem and you are upside down and very wet. If I did either I would do it with flush solid shank rivets. No takers on the Rocky Mountain engine monitor? I'll wait to the weekend then post it to Matronics. Regards, Norman Hunger -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011031/8d4a3d4d/attachment.htm From tedd_mchenry at agilent.com Wed Oct 31 09:30:34 2001 From: tedd_mchenry at agilent.com (MCHENRY,TEDD (A-Canada,ex1)) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Getting back to RVs... Message-ID: Short of buying a special tool, does anyone have a suggestion how to dimple the holes near the end of the rudder bottom rib (RV-6)? I made a small C-clamp tool to do the HS and VS tip ribs (http://www.vansairforce.org/projects/Tedd_McHenry/onephoto.cgi?106-0685_IMG .JPG), but the end is too large to fit into the narrow end of the rudder ribs. Tedd McHenry Surrey, BC From tlaw at yukon.net Wed Oct 31 11:21:27 2001 From: tlaw at yukon.net (Tom & Marilyn Law) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Getting back to RVs... Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.20011031112149.9c271592@mail1.yukon.net> Tedd, For the real hard to get at places to dimple I used the "pop" style dimple dies but instead of using the nail (which is too long to get into the rib) to pull them I put a short piece if nail ......about 1/4 inch long.....between them to align them then squeezed the dies with a pair of vise grips that I ground to quite sharp .....duck bill style....and I also used the "duck billed" vise grips to squeeze the rivits too.....the rivits done this way are much easier to squeeze if they are heated and quenched first. On a couple of the really tight places I used pop rivits. Tom Law Whitehorse RV6A Fuel Tanks At 10:30 AM 10/31/01 -0700, you wrote: >Short of buying a special tool, does anyone have a suggestion how to dimple >the holes near the end of the rudder bottom rib (RV-6)? I made a small >C-clamp tool to do the HS and VS tip ribs >(http://www.vansairforce.org/projects/Tedd_McHenry/onephoto.cgi?106-0685_IMG >.JPG), but the end is too large to fit into the narrow end of the rudder >ribs. > >Tedd McHenry >Surrey, BC >_______________________________________________ >Wing mailing list >Wing@vansairforce.org >http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > > From tedd_mchenry at agilent.com Wed Oct 31 12:26:24 2001 From: tedd_mchenry at agilent.com (MCHENRY,TEDD (A-Canada,ex1)) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Getting back to RVs... Message-ID: Homer Rogers replied to my question about dimpling the rudder bottom rib holes with a idea so good I thought I'd better post it to the Wing list. I'm going to give Homer's idea a try, and I'll post pictures of the results. Tedd -----Original Message----- From: homer rogers [mailto:shrogers@rctvonline.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 10:52 AM To: MCHENRY,TEDD (A-Canada,ex1) Subject: rivetting Hi Ted, In regards to your query about dimpling/riveting the more difficult portions of your empennage. I took a small 1 inch opening heavy duty 'C' clamp and ground away the anvil strengthening web portion at the bottom of the clamp,leaving only the flat surface left. Into this I drilled a hole in the centre,matching the rivet diameter. Using this hole as a guide, I countersunk a 100 degree angled counter bore into the top surface of this anvil portion facing the screw. Most clamps are of ductile steel and will bend a certain amount without breaking . I put the clamp in a vise and massaged the anvil over carefully so I could do the 100 degree counterbore using my drill press. A long gentle curve is better than sharp bends. Counterbore only deep enough to allow the rivet to sit slightly below flush when inserted. The clamp was then straightened out to original configuration. Placing the clamp in position over the rib rivet hole, and using the recommended rivet as the pressing medium, I then inserted a small piece of steel, such as a holeless washer, on the rivet head, I tightened the clamp. Voila, countersunk hole. You might strengthen this clamp by welding on a piece of metal where the bending occurred, and dressing it down so as to not hurt your hands during handling. You might consider tack welding the hole-less washer in place on the screw anvil portion of the clamp. . I used this 'dimple/rivet press' in numerous spots during building. I hope this might be of some help. Homer From tedd at vansairforce.org Wed Nov 7 20:24:28 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] M-14P (Not RV-related) Message-ID: <20011108052254.BGLB16585.priv-edtnes10-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> This is definitely not RV-related, but given the interest in the SR3500 I thought some on this list might be interested in this link. It's the web site of an Australian company that imports the Vedeneyev M-14P radial engine, and it has lots of interesting information about the engine, including some diagrams. http://www.redstaraviation.com.au/M-14P/m-14p.html Tedd McHenry tedd@vansairforce.org From tedd_mchenry at agilent.com Thu Nov 8 09:48:43 2001 From: tedd_mchenry at agilent.com (MCHENRY,TEDD (A-Canada,ex1)) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Affordable Turbine Power Message-ID: ATP emailed me this information today, which I thought I'd share with the group. Tedd McHenry Surrey, BC ---------- From: "Heather Evans" To: "Tedd McHenry" Subject: Re: Price Quote Date: Thu, Nov 8, 2001, 08:35 Mr. McHenry, Hello! Thank you for your request of information on the ATP 6.5 Turbine Engine. The following is some generalized information on the 6.5. Weight 185 lbs Length 32'' overall to prop flange Diameter 12 1/2" maximum located at the hot section 10" diameter of gearbox Height 16" overall located at accessory pad on gearbox Burns JetA, Kerosene, Diesel and Gasoline The preferred fuels are JetA and Kerosene Four point conical mount 20 to 1 double planetary gearbox Gearbox designed for 500 hp continuous 600 hp peak Example ( If turbine is turning 60,000 rpm prop turning 3000 rpm) Single stage radial flow turbine centrifugal compressor Electronic fuel injection Electronic ignition 120hp 10.7 gals/hr 300 lbs thrust at 2650 rpm 180hp 13.3 gals/hr 450lbs thrust at 2750 rpm 240hp 16.6 gals/hr 600lbs thrust at 3000rpm maximum rpm at propeller 3200 rpm usable rpm range in fight 2500 to 3200 rpm Designed to operate efficiently at variable rpm The intro introductory price for the 6.5 Turbine engine is $23,000.00 (engine only). In order to hold this price you must first put down a deposit of 25%. We will soon be recommending the most efficient propeller. Production for the 6.5 starts Jan. 2002. We are also going to be debuting a pusher at Oshkosh 2002!!Thanks for interest in ATP if you are in need of further information please feel free to email or call. You can visit our web page at www.atpcoinc.com Take Care, Heather L. Mitchell Director of Internet Sales -- On Fri, 12 Oct 2001 07:47:09 Tedd McHenry wrote: >I'm interested in using your ATP 6.5 engine on my RV-6. What is the price >of this engine? Are you currently making deliveries? Would I have to make >any alterations to my fuel system to adapt it for use with this engine? > >Tedd McHenry >Surrey, BC >Canada > From tedd at vansairforce.org Mon Nov 12 11:13:12 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Mighty Mini Brake Message-ID: I saw a tool today at Princes Auto called a "Mighty Mini Brake," or words to that effect. It's an 18" bending brake, made from aluminum plate, for CDN$55. It would only be good for small jobs, of course. Does anyone on the list have experience with that tool, or similar tools? Tedd McHenry Surrey, BC From nhunger at sprint.ca Mon Nov 12 12:19:26 2001 From: nhunger at sprint.ca (Norman) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Mighty Mini Brake References: Message-ID: <000c01c16bb7$543919a0$74e494d1@oemcomputer> > I saw a tool today at Princes Auto called a "Mighty Mini Brake," or words > to that effect. It's an 18" bending brake, made from aluminum plate, for > CDN$55. It would only be good for small jobs, of course. Does anyone on > the list have experience with that tool, or similar tools? I have something similar from Harbor. I paid $29 USD for it. I regret that I bought it very late in construction. Next time there are a few tools that I will buck up for at the start. A heavy 30" shear/brake and a pneumatic squeezer are at the top of the list. Norman Hunger RV6A Delta BC From tedd at vansairforce.org Mon Nov 12 14:52:27 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Mighty Mini Brake In-Reply-To: <000c01c16bb7$543919a0$74e494d1@oemcomputer> Message-ID: Norman: On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Norman wrote: > > I have something similar from Harbor. I paid $29 USD for it. I regret > that I bought it very late in construction. Just to clarify: do you regret that you bought it AT ALL, or do you regret that you waited so long to buy it? Tedd From nhunger at sprint.ca Mon Nov 12 15:23:49 2001 From: nhunger at sprint.ca (Norman) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Mighty Mini Brake References: Message-ID: <002601c16bd1$15f1f580$f4e794d1@oemcomputer> > Just to clarify: do you regret that you bought it AT ALL, or do you > regret that you waited so long to buy it? I regret that I waited so long to buy it as I have made many extra items. The stuff I've made since I've had it look much better. I am planning on replacing it with a bigger and better version, hopefully including a shear. Norman Hunger RV6A Delta BC From payaremchuk at hotmail.com Tue Nov 13 22:17:44 2001 From: payaremchuk at hotmail.com (Perry Yaremchuk) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Re: Wing digest, Vol 1 #18 - 3 msgs Message-ID: Thanks for all the hot tips, fellas, but you're really scarin' me!!! WHY do I need a shear, and a brake etc. etc. I thought all the parts were included, and there was no major forming to be done?!?!?! As an aside...my Dad built a great little adjustable brake for bending the dozens of 4130 steel brackets for his Osprey II, and the 'clamp' part of the brake could be flipped over for a larger radius for bending aluminum. I can assure you, however, that the many hours spent adjusting, re-welding, grinding, filing and tinkering with this hardly compare with spending $50 at the store and getting to work on your kit! Best of buildin' to all of you! >From: wing-request@vansairforce.org >Reply-To: wing@vansairforce.org >To: wing@vansairforce.org >Subject: Wing digest, Vol 1 #18 - 3 msgs >Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:01:01 -0800 > >Send Wing mailing list submissions to > wing@vansairforce.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > wing-request@vansairforce.org > >You can reach the person managing the list at > wing-admin@vansairforce.org > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >than "Re: Contents of Wing digest..." > > >Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Mighty Mini Brake (Norman) > 2. Re: Mighty Mini Brake (Tedd McHenry) > 3. Re: Mighty Mini Brake (Norman) > >--__--__-- > >Message: 1 >From: "Norman" >To: >Subject: Re: [Wing] Mighty Mini Brake >Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:19:26 -0800 >Reply-To: wing@vansairforce.org > > > I saw a tool today at Princes Auto called a "Mighty Mini Brake," or >words > > to that effect. It's an 18" bending brake, made from aluminum plate, >for > > CDN$55. It would only be good for small jobs, of course. Does anyone >on > > the list have experience with that tool, or similar tools? > >I have something similar from Harbor. I paid $29 USD for it. I regret that >I >bought it very late in construction. Next time there are a few tools that I >will buck up for at the start. A heavy 30" shear/brake and a pneumatic >squeezer are at the top of the list. > >Norman Hunger >RV6A Delta BC > > > >--__--__-- > >Message: 2 >Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 14:52:27 -0800 (PST) >From: Tedd McHenry >To: wing@vansairforce.org >Subject: Re: [Wing] Mighty Mini Brake >Reply-To: wing@vansairforce.org > >Norman: > >On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Norman wrote: > > > > I have something similar from Harbor. I paid $29 USD for it. I regret > > that I bought it very late in construction. > >Just to clarify: do you regret that you bought it AT ALL, or do you >regret that you waited so long to buy it? > >Tedd > > > >--__--__-- > >Message: 3 >From: "Norman" >To: >Subject: Re: [Wing] Mighty Mini Brake >Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:23:49 -0800 >Reply-To: wing@vansairforce.org > > > Just to clarify: do you regret that you bought it AT ALL, or do you > > regret that you waited so long to buy it? > >I regret that I waited so long to buy it as I have made many extra items. >The stuff I've made since I've had it look much better. I am planning on >replacing it with a bigger and better version, hopefully including a shear. > >Norman Hunger >RV6A Delta BC > > > > >--__--__-- > >_______________________________________________ >Wing mailing list >Wing@vansairforce.org >http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > > >End of Wing Digest _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp From dgmurray at telusplanet.net Wed Nov 14 06:30:18 2001 From: dgmurray at telusplanet.net (Douglas G. Murray) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Re: Wing digest, Vol 1 #18 - 3 msgs References: Message-ID: <001201c16d19$7639e440$0100007f@dgmurray> Perry - I heard Van tell of a couple of builders who 'thought' that they HAD to have the perfect workshop finished and equiped with all the tools known to the building industry before they could successfully build their aircraft. The builders brought in 'progress pictures' of their shop and tools for over two years to show Van. As he recalled - they never did start on the Rv-4 they had planned to when they started. Just get the kit and start building a bit each day. You won't regret the effort or the number of friends you will find along the way. Doug Murray Southern Alberta RV-6 All done and legal but still too windy for first flight :-)) ----- Original Message ----- From: Perry Yaremchuk To: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 11:17 PM Subject: [Wing] Re: Wing digest, Vol 1 #18 - 3 msgs > Thanks for all the hot tips, fellas, but you're really scarin' me!!! > WHY do I need a shear, and a brake etc. etc. I thought all the parts were > included, and there was no major forming to be done?!?!?! > As an aside...my Dad built a great little adjustable brake for bending the > dozens of 4130 steel brackets for his Osprey II, and the 'clamp' part of the > brake could be flipped over for a larger radius for bending aluminum. I can > assure you, however, that the many hours spent adjusting, re-welding, > grinding, filing and tinkering with this hardly compare with spending $50 at > the store and getting to work on your kit! > > Best of buildin' to all of you! > > > >From: wing-request@vansairforce.org > >Reply-To: wing@vansairforce.org > >To: wing@vansairforce.org > >Subject: Wing digest, Vol 1 #18 - 3 msgs > >Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 12:01:01 -0800 > > > >Send Wing mailing list submissions to > > wing@vansairforce.org > > > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > >or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > wing-request@vansairforce.org > > > >You can reach the person managing the list at > > wing-admin@vansairforce.org > > > >When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > >than "Re: Contents of Wing digest..." > > > > > >Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Re: Mighty Mini Brake (Norman) > > 2. Re: Mighty Mini Brake (Tedd McHenry) > > 3. Re: Mighty Mini Brake (Norman) > > > >--__--__-- > > > >Message: 1 > >From: "Norman" > >To: > >Subject: Re: [Wing] Mighty Mini Brake > >Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:19:26 -0800 > >Reply-To: wing@vansairforce.org > > > > > I saw a tool today at Princes Auto called a "Mighty Mini Brake," or > >words > > > to that effect. It's an 18" bending brake, made from aluminum plate, > >for > > > CDN$55. It would only be good for small jobs, of course. Does anyone > >on > > > the list have experience with that tool, or similar tools? > > > >I have something similar from Harbor. I paid $29 USD for it. I regret that > >I > >bought it very late in construction. Next time there are a few tools that I > >will buck up for at the start. A heavy 30" shear/brake and a pneumatic > >squeezer are at the top of the list. > > > >Norman Hunger > >RV6A Delta BC > > > > > > > >--__--__-- > > > >Message: 2 > >Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 14:52:27 -0800 (PST) > >From: Tedd McHenry > >To: wing@vansairforce.org > >Subject: Re: [Wing] Mighty Mini Brake > >Reply-To: wing@vansairforce.org > > > >Norman: > > > >On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Norman wrote: > > > > > > I have something similar from Harbor. I paid $29 USD for it. I regret > > > that I bought it very late in construction. > > > >Just to clarify: do you regret that you bought it AT ALL, or do you > >regret that you waited so long to buy it? > > > >Tedd > > > > > > > >--__--__-- > > > >Message: 3 > >From: "Norman" > >To: > >Subject: Re: [Wing] Mighty Mini Brake > >Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 15:23:49 -0800 > >Reply-To: wing@vansairforce.org > > > > > Just to clarify: do you regret that you bought it AT ALL, or do you > > > regret that you waited so long to buy it? > > > >I regret that I waited so long to buy it as I have made many extra items. > >The stuff I've made since I've had it look much better. I am planning on > >replacing it with a bigger and better version, hopefully including a shear. > > > >Norman Hunger > >RV6A Delta BC > > > > > > > > > >--__--__-- > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Wing mailing list > >Wing@vansairforce.org > >http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > > > > > >End of Wing Digest > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > From tedd_mchenry at agilent.com Fri Nov 16 14:28:23 2001 From: tedd_mchenry at agilent.com (tedd_mchenry@agilent.com) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets Message-ID: I'm looking for a handful of Cherry rivets (CCR-264SS-3-2). I'd tell you why, but it's too embarrassing. Does anyone know if there's a source in the Vancouver area, or do I have to order from Aircraft Spruce or some such place? Tedd McHenry Surrey, BC From rv7 at b4.ca Fri Nov 16 14:55:20 2001 From: rv7 at b4.ca (Rob Prior) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets References: Message-ID: <3BF59958.D123B2F2@b4.ca> Now, now... The story *must* be told, if any support is to be given... 8-) You could try Lindair, or perhaps Demel in Kelowna? They should be able to get them to you reasonably quickly... -RB4 tedd_mchenry@agilent.com wrote: > I'm looking for a handful of Cherry rivets (CCR-264SS-3-2). I'd tell you > why, but it's too embarrassing. Does anyone know if there's a source in the > Vancouver area, or do I have to order from Aircraft Spruce or some such > place? > > Tedd McHenry > Surrey, BC > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing -- --------- Rob Prior rv7 "at" b4.ca ----------------------------- Stop dreaming... Start flying From tedd_mchenry at agilent.com Fri Nov 16 15:07:32 2001 From: tedd_mchenry at agilent.com (tedd_mchenry@agilent.com) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets Message-ID: No Leavens in Vancouver, unfortunately. Lindair doesn't have 'em, although they can get 'em. Demel is checking for me, although they're not exactly local. What would be really nice would be an industrial supply house that carries them. It's always hard to get this sort of thing in Vancouver. Okay, in the interest of full disclosure, and maybe to save someone else from making the same mistake I did, here's why I need them. On the R-607/R-608 rudder reinforcing plates, you will see that there are eight rivet holes: four around the outside, two in the center (which also hold the rivnut), and one on either side of the rivnut. Well, after closing up the rudder skin, I noticed that I completely forgot to put rivets in the holes on either side of the rivnuts. So my choices are to drill the skin off one side and install the rivets, or use blind rivets. I have opted to go with blind rivets; after all, nobody will every see them. Expect now, of course, all of western Canada knows I'm a doofus anyway. Tedd From tedd_mchenry at agilent.com Fri Nov 16 15:13:09 2001 From: tedd_mchenry at agilent.com (MCHENRY,TEDD (A-Canada,ex1)) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:12 2005 Subject: [Wing] Tips on Web Site Message-ID: Glen Tinckler has posted a couple of new tips on riveting to the Wing web site. Glen is a licensed Structures AME. You can see Glen's tips, along with all the others, at http://www.vansairforce.org/tips/ Don't be shy, post your own tips. Tedd From jayeandscott at shaw.ca Fri Nov 16 16:42:21 2001 From: jayeandscott at shaw.ca (Jaye and Scott Jackson) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets References: Message-ID: <002401c16f00$b812af80$0200a8c0@vc.shawcable.net> There now- don't you feel better? Confession is good for the soul. Kinda cathartic. I know I've got a few skeletons hangin' in my closet that could use exorcizing...Just like you're not a real floatplane pilot until you've fallen into the ocean twice with all your maps and lost your sunglasses to boot, you're now a REAL builder! Scott in Vancouver Do Not Archive ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 3:07 PM Subject: RE: [Wing] Cherry Rivets > No Leavens in Vancouver, unfortunately. Lindair doesn't have 'em, although > they can get 'em. Demel is checking for me, although they're not exactly > local. What would be really nice would be an industrial supply house that > carries them. It's always hard to get this sort of thing in Vancouver. > > Okay, in the interest of full disclosure, and maybe to save someone else > from making the same mistake I did, here's why I need them. On the > R-607/R-608 rudder reinforcing plates, you will see that there are eight > rivet holes: four around the outside, two in the center (which also hold > the rivnut), and one on either side of the rivnut. Well, after closing up > the rudder skin, I noticed that I completely forgot to put rivets in the > holes on either side of the rivnuts. So my choices are to drill the skin > off one side and install the rivets, or use blind rivets. I have opted to > go with blind rivets; after all, nobody will every see them. Expect now, of > course, all of western Canada knows I'm a doofus anyway. > > Tedd > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing From ham at hammcc.com Fri Nov 16 18:06:09 2001 From: ham at hammcc.com (Hamilton McClymont) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets In-Reply-To: <3BF59958.D123B2F2@b4.ca> Message-ID: How about the guys at Sonex? I'm planning an afternoon flight up to OSH tomorrow, maybe I could pick them up! :-) Ham 604-241-2480 414-302-6650 this week http://www.hammcc.com > -----Original Message----- > From: wing-admin@vansairforce.org [mailto:wing-admin@vansairforce.org]On > Behalf Of Rob Prior > Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 2:55 PM > To: wing@vansairforce.org > Subject: Re: [Wing] Cherry Rivets > > > Now, now... The story *must* be told, if any support is to be given... 8-) > > You could try Lindair, or perhaps Demel in Kelowna? They should > be able to get > them to you reasonably quickly... > > -RB4 > > tedd_mchenry@agilent.com wrote: > > > I'm looking for a handful of Cherry rivets (CCR-264SS-3-2). > I'd tell you > > why, but it's too embarrassing. Does anyone know if there's a > source in the > > Vancouver area, or do I have to order from Aircraft Spruce or some such > > place? > > > > Tedd McHenry > > Surrey, BC > > _______________________________________________ > > Wing mailing list > > Wing@vansairforce.org > > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > > -- > --------- > Rob Prior > rv7 "at" b4.ca > ----------------------------- > Stop dreaming... Start flying > > > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > From 2w at telus.net Fri Nov 16 18:56:32 2001 From: 2w at telus.net (Bill Robson) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets References: Message-ID: <000d01c16f13$769ac200$8922b38e@bc.hsia.telus.net> Hello Tedd Before you go and purchase expensive cherry rivets.... Please correct me if I am out in left field on this? But, I thought a person could only close one side of any control surface until the illusious RAA inspector gave his approval to close? Bill Robson RV-6 Jig From tedd at vansairforce.org Fri Nov 16 19:01:03 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets Message-ID: <20011117035901.IQWM19365.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> I found the rivets at Demel. Thanks to everyone for their help. >But, I thought a person could only close one >side of any >control surface until the illusious RAA inspector gave his approval to >close? Bill: You are correct. However, in this case the inspector told me it was okay to close most of the rudder, just leaving the corners loose so that he can peer inside. Unfortunately, I left enough room to look but not enough to buck. By the way, I would not count on being able to do this. This is something I worked out with my inspector, but it might not be acceptable to all inspectors. Tedd From gmalich at telus.net Sat Nov 17 10:59:21 2001 From: gmalich at telus.net (Gunter Malich) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Inspections - Was Cherry Rivets References: <20011117035901.IQWM19365.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> Message-ID: <007201c16f99$f75b4dc0$6501a8c0@mycomputer> Given the the inspector's need to view all internal structure, I also been wondering how far to go in rivetting the tail and wings. It would seem to be a bit of a judgement call for the inspector -- if one side of every wing/tail panel is left completely open, it's easier for the inspector to view, but the downside is he's got less final-rivetted structure to assess. The more the panels are complete, the harder it is to view. Tedd's comment about "working it out with the inspector" sounds reasonable. The risk, I guess, is that the inspector you make arrangements with at empennage build time may not be the one who you see during your empennage/wing internal inspection. For people like me (read S-L-O-W builder!) a lot of time may elapse between HS and wing completion. I'm wondering what the experiences have been for others on the list. It's a whole lot more convenient to do as much rivetting as possible while parts are still in the jig, but I'd hate to go overboard on closing the structure and have to undo rivetting work. Any insight from the listers who have been there? Gunter Malich Delta, BC (Smacking those RV8 tail rivets) > You are correct. However, in this case the inspector told me it was okay to > close most of the rudder, just leaving the corners loose so that he can peer > inside. Unfortunately, I left enough room to look but not enough to buck. > > By the way, I would not count on being able to do this. This is something I > worked out with my inspector, but it might not be acceptable to all > inspectors. > > Tedd > From rdkennett at home.com Sat Nov 17 12:38:42 2001 From: rdkennett at home.com (Robert & Della Kennett) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Inspections - Was Cherry Rivets References: <20011117035901.IQWM19365.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> <007201c16f99$f75b4dc0$6501a8c0@mycomputer> Message-ID: <000b01c16fa7$d8f76cc0$f4aa4318@ok.shawcable.net> Gunter: When I first started my project almost five years ago, there was a very accomodating inspector in our area who would keep an unofficial record of inspections. He would let you take the smaller parts(ie. control surfaces, vertical and horizontal stabilizer) to his house and he would have a look at them and let you know if it was okay to close them. He would then sign them off officially and send in the paper work when he came to do the wing inspection. This procedure had worked out well for previous builders in the area and definitely helps to reduce costs if you like to finish items off completely in the jigs before proceeding to the next task. Unfortuneately, by the time I was ready for my wing inspection, this particular inspector was no longer doing them.... As it turned out the new inspector was willing to accept my word along with some entries/photographs I had made in my builder's log. It also didn't hurt that he knew the previous inspector. It all turned out okay in the end, but I was sweating for a few weeks wondering if I was going to need to open up everything in order to get it signed off. As far as how far to take construction, both inspectors were happy with being able to see inside a corner of the almost completed structure. You are probably okay provided you don't close the pieces up completely like I did. I found that both inspectors were very reasonable people that wanted to work with the builders rather than find an excuse not to allow them to fly. Another thing to watch for is that the paper work actually gets sent in. When I was getting the wing inspection, the inspector indicated that he would like to see inside the fuselage before I completely closed up the area under the seats (some inspectors don't need to see the fuselage at all as they will sign it off during the final inspection). When I requested the fuselage inspection, the MD-RA did not have any record of the wing inspection having been completed. Fortuneately, I had proof that it had been done and the paper work was eventually located. Rob Kennett Westbank, B.C. RV-6A (almost finished - just the wiring, propeller, fiberglass work, paint, and miscellaneous other small tasks to go..., first flight in spring/summer 2002 ??? ) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gunter Malich" To: Sent: November 17, 2001 10:59 AM Subject: [Wing] Inspections - Was Cherry Rivets > Given the the inspector's need to view all internal structure, I also been > wondering how far to go in rivetting the tail and wings. It would seem to > be a bit of a judgement call for the inspector -- if one side of every > wing/tail panel is left completely open, it's easier for the inspector to > view, but the downside is he's got less final-rivetted structure to assess. > The more the panels are complete, the harder it is to view. > > Tedd's comment about "working it out with the inspector" sounds reasonable. > The risk, I guess, is that the inspector you make arrangements with at > empennage build time may not be the one who you see during your > empennage/wing internal inspection. For people like me (read S-L-O-W > builder!) a lot of time may elapse between HS and wing completion. > > I'm wondering what the experiences have been for others on the list. It's a > whole lot more convenient to do as much rivetting as possible while parts > are still in the jig, but I'd hate to go overboard on closing the structure > and have to undo rivetting work. > > Any insight from the listers who have been there? > > Gunter Malich > Delta, BC > (Smacking those RV8 tail rivets) > > > > You are correct. However, in this case the inspector told me it was okay > to > > close most of the rudder, just leaving the corners loose so that he can > peer > > inside. Unfortunately, I left enough room to look but not enough to buck. > > > > By the way, I would not count on being able to do this. This is something > I > > worked out with my inspector, but it might not be acceptable to all > > inspectors. > > > > Tedd > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > From nhunger at sprint.ca Sat Nov 17 21:42:46 2001 From: nhunger at sprint.ca (Norman) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Inspections - Was Cherry Rivets References: <20011117035901.IQWM19365.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> <007201c16f99$f75b4dc0$6501a8c0@mycomputer> Message-ID: <000701c16ff3$da7dd420$9fea94d1@oemcomputer> > Given the the inspector's need to view all internal structure, I also been > wondering how far to go in rivetting the tail and wings. It would seem to > be a bit of a judgement call for the inspector -- if one side of every > wing/tail panel is left completely open, it's easier for the inspector to > view, but the downside is he's got less final-rivetted structure to assess. > The more the panels are complete, the harder it is to view. > > I'm wondering what the experiences have been for others on the list. It's a > whole lot more convenient to do as much rivetting as possible while parts > are still in the jig, but I'd hate to go overboard on closing the structure > and have to undo rivetting work. > > Any insight from the listers who have been there? I recall doing about 3/4 of the skins. On the wings I left one skin completely off with the other done and the leading edge completely done. Norman Hunger RV6A Delta BC Moving next weekend From dgmurray at telusplanet.net Sun Nov 18 17:25:06 2001 From: dgmurray at telusplanet.net (Douglas G. Murray) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets References: <000d01c16f13$769ac200$8922b38e@bc.hsia.telus.net> Message-ID: <001f01c17099$062ffd00$571ab8a1@dgmurray> Bill - Hope to clear up any confusion out there -- The RAA dose not do any inspections on aircraft. ALL inspections in Canada come from MD-RA Inspectors who really want to see inside ALL structures before closure. Happy Building, Doug Murray MD-RA Inspector Southwestern Alberta PS. I don't really think that I am that illustrious :-)) ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Robson <2w@telus.net> To: Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 7:56 PM Subject: Re: [Wing] Cherry Rivets > Hello Tedd > Before you go and purchase expensive cherry rivets.... Please correct me if > I am > out in left field on this? But, I thought a person could only close one > side of any > control surface until the illusious RAA inspector gave his approval to > close? > Bill Robson RV-6 Jig > > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > From 2w at telus.net Sun Nov 18 18:20:49 2001 From: 2w at telus.net (Bill Robson) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets References: <000d01c16f13$769ac200$8922b38e@bc.hsia.telus.net> <001f01c17099$062ffd00$571ab8a1@dgmurray> Message-ID: <000b01c170a0$ce1d75c0$05e2b440@bc.hsia.telus.net> Hello Doug Missed you for breakfast this morning but, had breakfast with Ken and Ted. As far as being illustrious,- I have alway thought of you as being distinguished, renowned and eminent. Regarding closure of structures, there is no doubt in my mind that any inspector would or want to to see inside of a constructed componet. The question being how much does a person close? What is the standard? The part left unriveted, is actually the part the inspector should see completed. This part is usually the most difficult to do and if there is going to be any bad rivets thats where you will find them! It would simplify the situation if the kit builder totally completed the flight component in the jig...... and the MD-RA just equiped the inspectors with bore scopes. That would permit the inspectors to see through holes as small as 0.250 inches. I hope you enjoyed your trip to Vancouver, talk to you soon Bill Robson RV-6 From dgmurray at telusplanet.net Sun Nov 18 20:39:43 2001 From: dgmurray at telusplanet.net (Douglas G. Murray) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets References: <000d01c16f13$769ac200$8922b38e@bc.hsia.telus.net> <001f01c17099$062ffd00$571ab8a1@dgmurray> <000b01c170a0$ce1d75c0$05e2b440@bc.hsia.telus.net> Message-ID: <000b01c170b4$36513380$4e1ab8a1@dgmurray> Bill - I had to wait a minute or two while my head shrunk back to the correct size before replying. Hardly - but thanks for the vote of confidence. Regarding your comment on closing structures. Yes, the second skin usually takes a higher level of skill to complete IF you are building a metal skinned aircraft. Tube & cloth, composite, wood aircraft all need the same inspection and USUALLY the level of workmanship is evident to the Inspector while inspecting the finished portion. On subsequent inspections the Inspector will review the completed parts even though they are cleared to be finished. Another area that the Inspector is looking for that a lot of builders may forget about is the internal workings of the parts - ie. bellcranks and related linkage, wiring and chafe protection, internal bracing and fastener integrity, and corrosion protection. The common practice is to leave one side of the structure open untill inspected. I doubt if borescopes will ever be accepted as a general rule as the cost would be prohibitive. Since the MD-RA is run by the moneys collected from the inspections done, the additional cost of supplying borescopes to each Inspector would drive the cost of the inspections right through the roof. Some builders have the idea that inspections are only a hinderence and cost increasing part of a project, but I submit that the inspections are a vital part of the integrity of a completed aircraft and a real safety issue for the builder. I can assure you that the Inspector is definately NOT getting rich from inspecting aircraft. We do it for your safety and our love of aviation. Hope this helps, Doug Murray ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Robson <2w@telus.net> To: Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 7:20 PM Subject: Re: [Wing] Cherry Rivets > Hello Doug > Missed you for breakfast this morning but, had breakfast with Ken and Ted. > As far as being illustrious,- I have alway thought of you as being > distinguished, > renowned and eminent. Regarding closure of structures, there is no doubt in > my > mind that any inspector would or want to to see inside of a constructed > componet. > The question being how much does a person close? What is the standard? > The part left unriveted, is actually the part the inspector should see > completed. > This part is usually the most difficult to do and if there is going to be > any bad rivets > thats where you will find them! It would simplify the situation if the kit > builder totally > completed the flight component in the jig...... and the MD-RA just equiped > the > inspectors with bore scopes. That would permit the inspectors to see > through holes > as small as 0.250 inches. > I hope you enjoyed your trip to Vancouver, talk to you soon > Bill Robson RV-6 > > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > From haywire at telus.net Mon Nov 19 03:03:04 2001 From: haywire at telus.net (Haywire) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets In-Reply-To: <001f01c17099$062ffd00$571ab8a1@dgmurray> Message-ID: Transport Canada, MSI 43, issued December 21, 2000, part 4.3 states; 4.3 In the case where a MD-RA is not available, or where a client insists on his aircraft being inspected by Transport Canada, the sponsoring organization shall forward the file to the appropriate Transport Canada Centre (TCC). Just thought it is fair to let builders know they still have a choice. Todd > > Hope to clear up any confusion out there -- The RAA dose not do any > inspections on aircraft. ALL inspections in Canada come from MD-RA > Inspectors who really want to see inside ALL structures before closure. > > Happy Building, > > Doug Murray > MD-RA Inspector > Southwestern Alberta > > PS. I don't really think that I am that illustrious :-)) > From Rob_Prior at CreoScitex.com Mon Nov 19 08:13:13 2001 From: Rob_Prior at CreoScitex.com (Rob Prior) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets Message-ID: <66F336FF8FD0484B943E0CF48D923C2CBC2C62@CSCEX04> Hi Doug, Perhaps you could answer a question, since you brought up the topic of corrosion protection. What level of protection do you expect to see when you look inside an aluminum structure? I'm just starting an RV-7, and don't plan on priming anything I don't have to (weight saving), just the mating surfaces where two parts meet. Looking inside the wing of my father's Cessna (and other production metal aircraft) through an inspection cover, I can see that it's been common practise in the industry to not prime *anything* inside. And I know RV-builders locally who are going to both extremes, one priming everything and one priming nothing, not even mating surfaces. So what's expected? Oh, and one other question, if I were to supply a borescope for my inspector, could I close all my surfaces before it was looked at? I have access to such a scope that I could borrow for the purpose of an inspection... -Rob Prior rv7 "at" b4.ca www.b4.ca/rv7 -----Original Message----- From: Douglas G. Murray [mailto:dgmurray@telusplanet.net] Sent: November 18, 2001 20:40 To: wing@vansairforce.org Subject: Re: [Wing] Cherry Rivets Another area that the Inspector is looking for that a lot of builders may forget about is the internal workings of the parts - ie. bellcranks and related linkage, wiring and chafe protection, internal bracing and fastener integrity, and corrosion protection. From ham at hammcc.com Mon Nov 19 08:55:59 2001 From: ham at hammcc.com (Hamilton McClymont) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets In-Reply-To: <66F336FF8FD0484B943E0CF48D923C2CBC2C62@CSCEX04> Message-ID: Rob: You should mention that your Dad's Cessna is a 190, and not one of the later spam cans. I believe that later Cessna owners had some trouble with unprimed innards, and as a result, Cessna started priming. It appears to have increased the resale value of later airplanes. Hammy 604-241-2480 414-302-6650 this week http://www.hammcc.com > -----Original Message----- > From: wing-admin@vansairforce.org [mailto:wing-admin@vansairforce.org]On > Behalf Of Rob Prior > Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 8:13 AM > To: 'wing@vansairforce.org' > Subject: RE: [Wing] Cherry Rivets > > > Hi Doug, > > Perhaps you could answer a question, since you brought up the topic of > corrosion protection. What level of protection do you expect to see when > you look inside an aluminum structure? I'm just starting an > RV-7, and don't > plan on priming anything I don't have to (weight saving), just the mating > surfaces where two parts meet. > > Looking inside the wing of my father's Cessna (and other production metal > aircraft) through an inspection cover, I can see that it's been common > practise in the industry to not prime *anything* inside. And I know > RV-builders locally who are going to both extremes, one priming everything > and one priming nothing, not even mating surfaces. > > So what's expected? > > Oh, and one other question, if I were to supply a borescope for my > inspector, could I close all my surfaces before it was looked at? I have > access to such a scope that I could borrow for the purpose of an > inspection... > > -Rob Prior > rv7 "at" b4.ca > www.b4.ca/rv7 From tedd_mchenry at agilent.com Mon Nov 19 13:47:33 2001 From: tedd_mchenry at agilent.com (MCHENRY,TEDD (A-Canada,ex1)) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Tight-space Dimpler Message-ID: Following a suggestion from Homer Rogers, I made myself a dimpling tool out of a C clamp, which can get into tight spaces such as the rudder top and bottom rib tips. It works very well. You can see how I made it at http://www.vansairforce.org/projects/Tedd_McHenry/dimpler/ I basically followed Homer's method, except that I made an extender for my countersink to more easily countersink a die in the body of the clamp. Tedd McHenry Surrey, BC From dgmurray at telusplanet.net Mon Nov 19 17:10:46 2001 From: dgmurray at telusplanet.net (Douglas G. Murray) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Inspection Questions was Cherry rivets References: <66F336FF8FD0484B943E0CF48D923C2CBC2C62@CSCEX04> Message-ID: <000501c17160$303eb6a0$271bb8a1@dgmurray> Rob, Remember that 2024-T3 has a pure aluminum cover over the alloy. This is a primary corrosion protection.While Cessna does some aircraft with no additional corrossion protection and some builders go all the way with full secondary corosion protection on all surfaces - including rivets, there is a requirement to show the MD-RA corrosion protection. In an metal aircraft that uses 2024-T3 I would expect to see as a minimum - secondary corrosion protection between all joined areas of the structure, complete coverage of the interior of all contol tubes, and all steel fittings and complete coverage of unprotected aluminum, such as 6061 -T6, and extrusons. Additional information on this topic can be found in AC43 - 13 - 1B in Section 10 - 14. Complete primary corrosion protection is required on tube and fabric aircraft and on all wood structures. As to the Borescope question - Unfortunately the present requirements state that no structure is to be closed without inspection by a qualified inspector. While the Borescope does present an interesting alternative, it hasn't at this time been approved. You might want to present the idea to the MD-RA office in Ontario and see if it will fly. There is a lot of material on the RV-List about various primers and paints so I will not address that topic. Hope this helps, Doug Murray ----- Original Message ----- From: Rob Prior To: Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 9:13 AM Subject: RE: [Wing] Cherry Rivets > Hi Doug, > > Perhaps you could answer a question, since you brought up the topic of > corrosion protection. What level of protection do you expect to see when > you look inside an aluminum structure? I'm just starting an RV-7, and don't > plan on priming anything I don't have to (weight saving), just the mating > surfaces where two parts meet. > > Looking inside the wing of my father's Cessna (and other production metal > aircraft) through an inspection cover, I can see that it's been common > practise in the industry to not prime *anything* inside. And I know > RV-builders locally who are going to both extremes, one priming everything > and one priming nothing, not even mating surfaces. > > So what's expected? > > Oh, and one other question, if I were to supply a borescope for my > inspector, could I close all my surfaces before it was looked at? I have > access to such a scope that I could borrow for the purpose of an > inspection... > > -Rob Prior > rv7 "at" b4.ca > www.b4.ca/rv7 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Douglas G. Murray [mailto:dgmurray@telusplanet.net] > Sent: November 18, 2001 20:40 > To: wing@vansairforce.org > Subject: Re: [Wing] Cherry Rivets > > > Another area that the Inspector is looking for that a lot of > builders may forget about is the internal workings of the parts - ie. > bellcranks and related linkage, wiring and chafe protection, internal > bracing and fastener integrity, and corrosion protection. > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > From tgannon at stoneboat.com Mon Nov 19 19:04:41 2001 From: tgannon at stoneboat.com (Terence Gannon) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Inspection Questions was Cherry rivets In-Reply-To: <000501c17160$303eb6a0$271bb8a1@dgmurray> Message-ID: Folks -- with all this talk of boroscopes and 'leaving corners open for inspection', I thought I would play devil's advocate for a moment and ask; "What if the part being inspected is not up to standard?" Doesn't the fact that you've pretty much closed the piece up mean a lot of drilled out rivets just to open the structure up, to say nothing of correcting the problem once you've opened the work up again? I can only imagine the tension that might erupt between inspector and builder if that were to be the verdict. All in all, it could make for a pretty toxic atmosphere. Not to impune anybody's reputation here, but let's face it, the category is called 'Amateur Built', after all. We're not pros, for the most part, and it's possible we may not have it right, particularly in the early stages of our projects. One additional comment about the inspection process -- I've always felt that the folks that have visited and spent time on my project were an absolute treasure trove of experience, advice, knowledge and positive encouragement -- all I have to do is discipline myself to listen. (Being a middle-aged know-it-all, that's a bit of a challenge). Seriously, though, I've learned that they are really there to help me get through the construction process, and by treating them as a 'friend of the project' as opposed to a formality that you have to get through, your project will be better off. In the case of my wing, I am going to try and have my inspector look at it with the top skin entirely off -- that way, I hope that if there is anything that needs to be put right, it can be done with a minimum of effort beyond the corrective action itself. Advice worth what you paid for it! Cheers... Terry in Calgary RV-6 S/N 24414 "Wings" From tedd at vansairforce.org Mon Nov 19 18:34:18 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Inspection Questions was Cherry rivets Message-ID: <20011120033207.RORB19365.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> >I've learned that they are really there to help me get through the >construction process, and by treating them as a 'friend of the project' as >opposed to a formality that you have to get through, your project will be >better off. Well said, Terry. Even though I have yet to have an inspection, I have already found my inspector extremely helpful. I look forward to every conversation I have with him. I hope that when he finds flaws with my building I have the grace to accept them and get on with making the necessary changes. Tedd From 2w at telus.net Mon Nov 19 22:32:08 2001 From: 2w at telus.net (Bill Robson) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Inspection Questions was Cherry rivets References: <20011120033207.RORB19365.priv-edtnes09-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.12]> Message-ID: <000901c1718d$145c3840$05e2b440@bc.hsia.telus.net> I just thought I would make every one aware that the new rate for inspectors travelling is $ 0.35 per Kilometer. Bill RV-6 From 2w at telus.net Tue Nov 20 20:53:31 2001 From: 2w at telus.net (Bill Robson) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Cherry Rivets References: Message-ID: <001201c17248$77dbf480$05e2b440@bc.hsia.telus.net> Hello Haywire Where would a person find this publication? Transport Canada MSI 43, issued December 21, 2000, Part 4.3. I would be very interested to read it! Thank you for your response Bill Robson RV-6 From haywire at telus.net Wed Nov 21 04:11:45 2001 From: haywire at telus.net (Haywire) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] TC inspections In-Reply-To: <001201c17248$77dbf480$05e2b440@bc.hsia.telus.net> Message-ID: Hi Bill; This publication was originally given to me by the local Transport Canada inspector, but you can also find it at http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/mainten/aarpc/msi/index_e.htm > -----Original Message----- > From: wing-admin@vansairforce.org [mailto:wing-admin@vansairforce.org]On > Behalf Of Bill Robson > Sent: November 20, 2001 8:54 PM > To: wing@vansairforce.org > Subject: Re: [Wing] Cherry Rivets > > > Hello Haywire > Where would a person find this publication? Transport Canada MSI 43, > issued December 21, 2000, Part 4.3. I would be very interested to read it! > Thank you for your response > Bill Robson RV-6 > > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > From nhunger at sprint.ca Thu Nov 22 00:27:26 2001 From: nhunger at sprint.ca (Norman) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Golf Bags and Skis Message-ID: <013801c1732f$85d572e0$c8e294d1@oemcomputer> I was looking at a mod to carry golf bags in a 6/7/9 by Dave Ford at http://members7.clubphoto.com/dave493645/553869/guest.phtml when I thought, gee, I could have done this as well as the ski compartment I have in my 6A. See mine at http://www.metronet.com/~dreeves/BuilderMods/NormanHunger/luggagecompartment_skirack.htm I figure that mine will carry one big golf bag or two mid sized bags. Dave's looks bigger. Mine goes back to the tail for really big ski's which is why it's floor is at the level of the longerons. The longer skis need to be up there to get loaded with my tip up canopy. Both sites hosted on Doug's most excellent site, thanks again Doug. Anyhow, nice work Dave. Norman Hunger RV6A Delta BC -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011122/67683e24/attachment.htm From tedd at vansairforce.org Thu Nov 22 07:53:10 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] New Project Photos on Wing Web Site Message-ID: <20011122155052.IJXO17072.priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.11]> Barry Tunzelmann and Marc DeGirolamo have revised their project web pages with recent photos of their RV projects. You can see them at http://www.vansairforce.org/projects Barry is building an RV-6, which he started in Canoe, BC but has recently moved to Edmonton. Marc completed and flew his RV-4 earlier this year, in Saskatoon. Tedd McHenry From dgmurray at telusplanet.net Thu Nov 22 22:18:45 2001 From: dgmurray at telusplanet.net (Douglas G. Murray) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Re: RV-6 C-GRPA FLYS References: <20011122155052.IJXO17072.priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.11]> Message-ID: <001901c173e6$b50ec180$b91db8a1@dgmurray> As of 13:05 DMST today my RV-6 project became an aircraft as it took to the air and flew straight and true. This aircraft is everything that Van's says it is and more. The kit arrived at my door eight years and eleven months ago and has been a great family project. I am very appreciative of all the help I received from other builders along the way, for I have learned a lot and gained many friends. IT IS WORTH THE EFFORT !! DON' T GIVE UP . Doug Murray Southern Alberta C-GRPA RV-6 // Tip-up// Sensenich F/P // Lycoming 0-360-A4M From tedd_mchenry at agilent.com Fri Nov 23 09:15:31 2001 From: tedd_mchenry at agilent.com (MCHENRY,TEDD (A-Canada,ex1)) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Re: RV-6 C-GRPA FLYS Message-ID: Doug: Fantastic! Thanks for the update, and for the words of encouragement. How would you feel about keeping us updated as you fly off the initial hours? I'm sure there are many others like me who never tire of hearing about the joys, and even the problems, of those first hours of flight. Send us a photo when you get the chance. Tedd McHenry Surrey, BC From tedd_mchenry at agilent.com Fri Nov 23 09:37:06 2001 From: tedd_mchenry at agilent.com (MCHENRY,TEDD (A-Canada,ex1)) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Lycoming Nomenclature Message-ID: > RV-6 // Tip-up// Sensenich F/P // Lycoming 0-360-A4M I got curious about Doug Murray's engine, and looked it up on the Lycoming web site. Lycoming has a PDF document that lists many--if not all--Lycoming piston engines, their basic specifications, and in what airframe they are found. You can see it at http://www.lycoming.textron.com/main.html Follow the links: Products > Engine Specifications > Certificated Piston Aircraft Engines and Installation Guide (SSP-401). Not the most stimulating reading around, but a good reference. Tedd McHenry Surrey, BC From dgmurray at telusplanet.net Fri Nov 23 11:17:50 2001 From: dgmurray at telusplanet.net (Douglas G. Murray) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Re: RV-6 C-GRPA FLYS References: Message-ID: <000d01c17453$8b82d780$051ab8a1@dgmurray> Tedd, Thanks for the note. I'd love to drop the list a line or two as I learn my aircrafts' personality. So far she's a real Lady. On the second flight I got into slow flight and the various configurations for stalls and the RV handled just perfectly. My test pilot ( I was too rusty for me to do the first flight ) said that the aircraft felt as though it has been in the air for years. Take care and keep building. Doug Murray ----- Original Message ----- From: MCHENRY,TEDD (A-Canada,ex1) To: Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 10:15 AM Subject: RE: [Wing] Re: RV-6 C-GRPA FLYS > Doug: > > Fantastic! Thanks for the update, and for the words of encouragement. > > How would you feel about keeping us updated as you fly off the initial > hours? I'm sure there are many others like me who never tire of hearing > about the joys, and even the problems, of those first hours of flight. > > Send us a photo when you get the chance. > > Tedd McHenry > Surrey, BC > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing > From mdeg at shaw.ca Fri Nov 23 15:37:46 2001 From: mdeg at shaw.ca (Marc Degirolamo) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Re: RV-6 C-GRPA FLYS References: <20011122155052.IJXO17072.priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.11]> <001901c173e6$b50ec180$b91db8a1@dgmurray> Message-ID: <000b01c17477$db11ed80$05e64218@ss.shawcable.net> congratulations Doug.........we'll have to get together next spring....Perhaps we can organize an RV flyin somewhere...? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Douglas G. Murray" To: Sent: Friday, November 23, 2001 12:18 AM Subject: [Wing] Re: RV-6 C-GRPA FLYS > As of 13:05 DMST today my RV-6 project became an aircraft as it took to the > air and flew straight and true. This aircraft is everything that Van's says > it is and more. The kit arrived at my door eight years and eleven months ago > and has been a great family project. I am very appreciative of all the help > I received from other builders along the way, for I have learned a lot and > gained many friends. > > IT IS WORTH THE EFFORT !! DON' T GIVE UP . > > > Doug Murray > Southern Alberta > > C-GRPA > RV-6 // Tip-up// Sensenich F/P // Lycoming 0-360-A4M > > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing From acornyn at telusplanet.net Sat Nov 24 10:11:25 2001 From: acornyn at telusplanet.net (Alan Cornyn) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] C-GRPA Message-ID: <000a01c17513$6f2af840$171db8a1@yourname> Rumor has it that Doug Murray did his first flight in his new RV-6 without his pants on. Any truth to that Doug? Al Cornyn Neighbor Heard Doug airborn RV-6 flying. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011124/0257b735/attachment.htm From dgmurray at telusplanet.net Sat Nov 24 14:53:40 2001 From: dgmurray at telusplanet.net (Douglas G. Murray) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] C-GRPA References: <000a01c17513$6f2af840$171db8a1@yourname> Message-ID: <000b01c1753a$dcb22560$8f1db8a1@dgmurray> Al - good shot!! Doug ----- Original Message ----- From: Alan Cornyn To: wing@vansairforce.org Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2001 11:11 AM Subject: [Wing] C-GRPA Rumor has it that Doug Murray did his first flight in his new RV-6 without his pants on. Any truth to that Doug? Al Cornyn Neighbor Heard Doug airborn RV-6 flying. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011124/f5259630/attachment.htm From bbristol at sympatico.ca Sat Nov 24 16:51:34 2001 From: bbristol at sympatico.ca (Robert Bristol) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Re: RV-6 C-GRPA FLYS References: <20011122155052.IJXO17072.priv-edtnes12-hme0.telusplanet.net@[192.168.42.11]> <001901c173e6$b50ec180$b91db8a1@dgmurray> Message-ID: <001501c1754b$55a41c20$0ac2d0d8@intranet.ca> Subject: [Wing] Re: RV-6 C-GRPA FLYS Congratulations Doug, glad to hear the flight went well and another RV has been completed. Enjoy the time in your RV and keep us updated on the performance when you have the data. Bob Bristol RV6A C-GCTZ 300 hours In the latest COPA again.. I guess they like my paint!! From acornyn at telusplanet.net Mon Nov 26 08:05:39 2001 From: acornyn at telusplanet.net (Alan Cornyn) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] RV-6 Fuselage Jig Message-ID: <001101c17694$31ef7aa0$d61db8a1@yourname> Does anyone need a fuselage jig for RV-6. It's in Pincher Creek, Alberta, and it's free, just pass it on when you are done. It is made with glued floor joists, so it is very straight. It has three flying airplanes out of it. Al Cornyn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://retrix.com/pipermail/wing/attachments/20011126/1829bc76/attachment.htm From tedd at vansairforce.org Wed Nov 28 07:18:58 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Email Addresses Message-ID: I have some out-of-date addresses for a few members. If you have the current address for any of these people, please let me know. Member Old Address ------------------- ----------------------- Mead, Jim & Phyllis Jim_Mead@bc.sympatico.ca Jensen, David drjensen@uniserve.com Stewart, Don dstewart@cancom.net Sager, Jim jsager@uniserve.com Gervais, Paul paul.gervais@gov.ab.ca Baldock, Dr. Bob rlbaldock@hotmail.com Hurlbut, Steve shurlbut@island.net Strike, Lt.Col, TK www.FX22@bellsouth.net Lindquist, Daniel vanfan@canada.com Thanks, Tedd McHenry Van's Air Force Western Canada Wing www.vansairforce.org From 2w at telus.net Wed Nov 28 16:35:19 2001 From: 2w at telus.net (Bill Robson) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Email Addresses References: Message-ID: <002501c1786d$b92f55a0$05e2b440@2wilctkujerewg> Hello Tedd Don Steward is now dkstewart@telus.net Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tedd McHenry" To: "Western Canada Wing List" Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 7:18 AM Subject: [Wing] Email Addresses > I have some out-of-date addresses for a few members. If you have the current address for any of these people, please let me know. > > Member Old Address > ------------------- ----------------------- > > Mead, Jim & Phyllis Jim_Mead@bc.sympatico.ca > Jensen, David drjensen@uniserve.com > Stewart, Don dstewart@cancom.net > Sager, Jim jsager@uniserve.com > Gervais, Paul paul.gervais@gov.ab.ca > Baldock, Dr. Bob rlbaldock@hotmail.com > Hurlbut, Steve shurlbut@island.net > Strike, Lt.Col, TK www.FX22@bellsouth.net > Lindquist, Daniel vanfan@canada.com > > Thanks, > > Tedd McHenry > Van's Air Force > Western Canada Wing > www.vansairforce.org > > _______________________________________________ > Wing mailing list > Wing@vansairforce.org > http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing From tedd at vansairforce.org Thu Nov 29 21:56:00 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] RV Active Desktop Message-ID: Those of you who use Windows 2000 or NT might enjoy my latest creation: the RV Active Desktop. I'm not going to explain how to set up Active Desktop, because I assume anyone who's interested in this will already know. But the URL you want is http://www.vansairforce.org/random_RV.html Put this on your Active Desktop and you'll have a different RV-related photo from the Wing web site each time you log in. By the way, I'm pleased to report that the new Wing email listserver software protected us from two viruses this week. Tedd McHenry Van's Air Force Western Canada Wing tedd@vansairforce.org www.vansairforce.org From tedd at vansairforce.org Fri Nov 30 19:16:50 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] Web Site Problems Message-ID: I've had a few reports of problems connecting to the web site in the last couple of days. I believe the problem was caused by someone accidentally disconnecting the wrong server during a furniture move at the company that hosts the Wing web site. The server is back on line, and you should all be able to connect now. Sorry for the inconvenience. --- Tedd McHenry Van's Air Force Western Canada Wing tedd@vansairforce.org www.vansairforce.org From 2w at telus.net Fri Nov 30 20:14:07 2001 From: 2w at telus.net (Bill Robson) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] RV Active Desktop References: Message-ID: <000401c17a1e$9efa5ce0$05e2b440@bc.hsia.telus.net> Hello Ted I have tried to access your active desktop program and always get the page that "this page can not be displayed" message. I'm doing something wrong?? Please advise Bill From kiwi at sunwave.net Sun Dec 2 09:42:11 2001 From: kiwi at sunwave.net (Barry Tunzelmann) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] RE :Doug Murray Message-ID: <01C17B15.9E647D40.kiwi@sunwave.net> In response to Doug's article about corrosion and the requirement to show the MD-RA that one has provided protection. What about the fast build kits that are not primed between the contact surfaces? Are the builders doing a spray in corrosion protection application after completion? Barry & Cindy Tunzelmann PH: (250) 832-3198 From rv7 at b4.ca Sun Dec 2 16:11:32 2001 From: rv7 at b4.ca (Rob Prior) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] [Fwd: RV-List: Good news and bad news.] Message-ID: <3C0AC334.19B46351@b4.ca> Okay, MD-RA types, how about this scenario, from the RV-List. Builder has *completed* his empennage kit. To closure. He's in the US, but in Canada that would mean that it had been inspected. Vandals break in, steal all his tools, and trample his empennage. Lucky for the builder, he was carrying builder's insurance. The insurance company tells him he can order a completed empennage from the manufacturer to replace it. So, how does this affect the 51% owner-built rule, how does MD-RA inspect the new tail, etc? -RB4 Ouch, my brain hurts... ABAYMAN@aol.com wrote: > --> RV-List message posted by: ABAYMAN@aol.com > > with builders risk, it will cover your airplane, is parts, avionics and > engine and prop and labor from theft or vandelisim. homeowners will pay for > your tools. my policy only allowed 3k for tools. not nearly enough for the > collection of tools i use in my business. i do have a commercial policy that > covers tools in vans. Nations Air, has already gave me the go ahead to get a > built set of elevators from vans. that will be nice not having to build > another set sine i don't have the jigs anymore. plus i'm painting and not > setup for riviting anymore.apparently my big lock and latch worked last > night, the camera equipment will be installed in the shop next weekend so the > employees don't know about it. > scott > tampa > i did hear a burgler was shot and killed by the homeowner, i wonder if he was > my guy > From tedd at vansairforce.org Sun Dec 2 16:37:23 2001 From: tedd at vansairforce.org (Tedd McHenry) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] [Fwd: RV-List: Good news and bad news.] In-Reply-To: <3C0AC334.19B46351@b4.ca> Message-ID: > The insurance company tells him he can order a completed empennage > from the manufacturer to replace it. Seems to me, however unfortunate for the builder, he would have to rebuild the empennage, wouldn't he? The builder could try to get compensated for the market value of the tail, or for his time, or perhaps for the purchase of a tail built by someone else. But I expect the policy would only cover the value of replacement parts. From nhunger at sprint.ca Sun Dec 2 16:56:17 2001 From: nhunger at sprint.ca (Norman) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] [Fwd: RV-List: Good news and bad news.] References: <3C0AC334.19B46351@b4.ca> Message-ID: <015601c17b95$51cfc900$57ea94d1@oemcomputer> > Okay, MD-RA types, how about this scenario, from the RV-List. Builder has > *completed* his empennage kit. To closure. He's in the US, but in Canada that > would mean that it had been inspected. Vandals break in, steal all his tools, > and trample his empennage. Lucky for the builder, he was carrying builder's > insurance. The insurance company tells him he can order a completed empennage > from the manufacturer to replace it. > > So, how does this affect the 51% owner-built rule, how does MD-RA inspect the > new tail, etc? He should contact his inspector for the final verdict but he will most likely be granted permission to continue building with the new factory completed tail. After all they were properly built by professionals. The Canadian inspection program of all components viewed by an inspector before closing is in place to insure that the majority of the metalwork is done properly, not to create employment for inspectors. Norman Hunger RV6A Delta BC Do not archive From robert.mccallum2 at sympatico.ca Sun Dec 2 18:28:59 2001 From: robert.mccallum2 at sympatico.ca (Robert McCallum) Date: Sun Jan 16 11:26:13 2005 Subject: [Wing] [Fwd: RV-List: Good news and bad news.] References: Message-ID: <3C0AE36B.2FB9567A@sympatico.ca> Part of the purpose of the 51% rule is to ensure that the builder is gaining the education that constructing a plane provides and having the records and inspections to "prove " that he did in fact construct the empennage would satisfy that requirement. The fact that the actual empennage which the builder constructed was destroyed and was replaced "SHOULD" not detract from the fact that the builder did construct and gain the education from, an empennage. BUT then again logic doesn't always prevail. Bob McC do not archive Tedd McHenry wrote: > > The insurance company tells him he can order a completed empennage > > from the manufacturer to replace it. > > Seems to me, however unfortunate for the builder, he would have to > rebuild the empennage, wouldn't he? The builder could try to get > compensated for the market value of the tail, or for his time, or > perhaps for the purchase of a tail built by someone else. But I > expect the policy would only cover the value of replacement parts. > >From the MDRA point of view, all that would be irrelevant, wouldn't > it? > > Tedd > > __________________