|
|
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<< Lancair Builders' Mail List >>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
I have a friend who has converted an ag plane (I'm not sure what it
used to be as I'm not familiar) to V-8 power with a cog-belt speed
reducer, on which he's used an IVO ground adjustable prop for quite
some time. He doesn't seem to be having any problems other than some
cracking of the stainless tape on the leading edge, which is user
replaceable. I attribute his success to the belt drive softening the
impulse loading on the hub. I, on the other hand, tried a two blade and a three blade IVO flight adjustable unit and couldn't make it work
to the IVO company's satisfaction (or mine, needless to say). They
require the user to apply some very tough metallic tape strips on
several parts of the hub to detect relative movement of the individual
blades in the blade clamps. On both the two and three blade props, I
could never fly for a few minutes without the tapes cracking - a sign
to IVO that the blades could not be immobilized in the hub and, at
least on my engine, (a Lyc O-235 with Hi-comp pistons making about
125 HP) unworkable.
(They bought the prop back).
In regards to the bad low-speed controllability with reflexed
ailerons, that's a distinct possibility so I'd think that they would
have to be neutralized just like the flaps, below a certain speed.
The thought is that, reflexed, they'd help you go faster, just like
the flaps, so they ought to be reset at the same speed as the flaps.
Also John, I didn't put right side pedals for all the same reasons you
give but now I hear that the Feds are dorking with us on this issue.
I've heard that an instructor can't legally give a BFR in a plane
without fully functional dual controls now (Bonanzas and the like,
excepted). What a bunch of idiots if true! Where else should a pilot
take a BFR than in the aircraft he (she) flies the most? I hope
I'm not hearing this correctly, but based on how the federales seem
to do things these days, silly me.
To ED Selby, I designed and installed my own latch system on my 235
with the early canopy system. The basic concept would work on either
canopy, though and I've sent marv a series of photos of how it works
on my plane. To my way of thinking, the parts are easy to build and
install - and it works, is lockable from the outside and isn't too
obvious as to how it works from the outside and it beats the pants
off those little M. Mouse thingies in the kit (at least the 235 kit).
The best tank vent idea I ever heard of I have to admit I stole from
a modeler. And so far, my tanks don't dump on unlevel ground or in
the air, or siphon, or spit back when you open the cap, plus it's
so simple that if you haven't done your vents yet, you ahould consider
it. I know a picture is worth a thousand words, but I'll try to
do it in words: For the wing tanks, run an Al. tube, 1/4 or 3/8
inch - whatever you plan to use - in through the high point of the
INBOARD end of the tank, just below the upper wing skin at a point
approximately where the upper wing surface curvature is the highest.
This needs to be close, but none of it is critical. The vent tube
should be routed along the INNER TOP of the tank to the OUTBOARD
high-point. Fasten it in place and seal around the penetration however
the manual says to do it. Then on the inboard end, and this is a key
element or it won't work, connect the end of the vent tube (above) to
a short stub of tubing epoxied into position so as to stick out the
bottom surface of the wing (the external vent opening) with
rubber or plastic tubing. The external end of the vent should be
beveled at about 45 degrees, facing forward, to provide a little
positive pressure in the tank.
How it works is simple: If the wing tip is high (the normal stance on
the ground) the outboard end of the vent tube is at the high point inside and uncovered, e.g., will breathe but not dump fuel. If the
tip is down, the outboard end of the vent is submerged but the inboard
end is higher than the level in the tank. This position could
conceivably lead to siphoning if the air above the gas really expanded
enough to pump it up the vent tube and out but I've never seen this
happen 460 hours of flying to some interesting places.
The header vent is similar, in through the aft at the top, run forward
internally to the highest point, with the external vent out the
bottom of the plane anywhere convenient (usually close to the rear
of the nose wheel well) with the same angle cut facing forward like
the wing tank vents.
By the way, it seems we're leaning equally toward retiring to either
the Oregon area I mentioned before (Corvallis area) or up as far as
the Cour D'Alene area of Idaho. (I think my wife believes Cour
D'Alene is more like where she grew up in Austria so the pressure is
on). If any of you gentle folks are from that part of the USA, I'd
appreciate hearing from you about things in general, and flying in
particular. Like - weather, VFR days per year, hanger availability,
and so forth. Thanking you in advance.
email: dfschaefer@usa.net
Cheers,
Dan Schaefer
N235SP
____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
|
|