Author: "JStiegel" <boe717@...> Time: Fri Oct 8, 2004 11:35 am PDT Link
Builders:
Some have said the builder can determine max gross wgt. at the
airworthyness inspection. Is this correct? Interesting post by Jon
Baker on posibility of raising MGW by changing catagory from acro to
Utililty to Normal. I have also heard of some builders raising the
MGW to 2000 in the RV-7. If any builder out there has done so, what
logic/calculations did you use. As has been pointed out, as
airplanes age they generally get a heavier empty weight. So, it
might be handy to specify a higher gross wgt. in the Normal catagory
and restricting the landing weight as Jon suggests. What are your
thoughts?
Regards,
John Stiegelmeyer
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "pepeborja925mb" <pepeborja925mb@...> Time: Fri Oct 8, 2004 11:51 am PDT Link
<SNIP>Some have said the builder can determine max gross wgt. at the
airworthyness inspection. Is this correct?<SNIP>
That's correct. The builder can write anything they like in the
data plate. If you want to be amused, go around the line at an RV
flyin and look at the data plates. For liability reasons, it's best
to do it lilke Van's says. After all, your "state" will be held in
trust for 18 years.
Jose.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: Phil Birkelbach <phil@...> Time: Fri Oct 8, 2004 1:04 pm PDT Link
You are the manufacturer of the airplane, so you can set all the limits
of the airplane yourself. You can put an aft CG limit just in front of
the tailwheel if you want. It might get you killed but you can legally
do it. There is no correlation between regulation and the laws of
physics and sometimes we get those two things confused. Just because it
is legal doesn't make is smart.
I don't think that I could get 2000 lbs in my RV-7 without putting the
CG too far aft, but then I haven't weighed it yet, so I don't know for
sure. The problem as I see it is that if you list the GW at 1800lbs
then later you put 1810 lbs in it then you are in violation of the regs,
but probably safe. If you list the plane at 2500 lbs and load it to
2490 lbs then you are legal, but will probably be a Darwin award
candidate by days end. Where is the happy middle ground? That is
really the question.
What limits gross weight in an airplane. Here are a few of my thoughts...
Wing loading and the structure of the wing - This could be an issue
with the RV-7 and I think it probably is. I base this assumption on
what I remember reading about the static test of the RV-8 wing that
Van's did after Bill died.
Structure of seats, baggage floors, fuel tanks, etc. - Probably not an
issue with the RV-7
Landing gear - Jury is out on this one, but if you land like me it
should probably be considered. :-)
Power to get the airplane off the ground and climb - Not an issue
unless you are using a VW engine. :-)
CG limits - Easily calculated after the airplane is weighed. Several
test pilots have indicated that Van's has the CG limits at the right
points so IMHO they should be used right out of the book
Aerodynmics - The higher the aircraft weight, the higher the angle of
attack that will be required at a given airspeed to keep the airplane
aloft. The airplane will stall at the critical angle of attack no
matter what else changes. In short the stall speed goes up with weight,
but then we all knew that didn't we?
I'm sure that there are other concerns but these are just what I could
think of.
With all that being said, I'll probalby list my GW at something higher
than the 1800 lbs (It depends on what my empty weight comes out to be
and where the empty CG is), but this is just legal cushion as far as I'm
concerned, for those days when it's calm as it can be and the wife just
can't live without whatever is in that bag for the weekend.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB (Reserved) - Panel
http://www.myrv7.com
JStiegel wrote:
>Builders:
>Some have said the builder can determine max gross wgt. at the
>airworthyness inspection. Is this correct? Interesting post by Jon
>Baker on posibility of raising MGW by changing catagory from acro to
>Utililty to Normal. I have also heard of some builders raising the
>MGW to 2000 in the RV-7. If any builder out there has done so, what
>logic/calculations did you use. As has been pointed out, as
>airplanes age they generally get a heavier empty weight. So, it
>might be handy to specify a higher gross wgt. in the Normal catagory
>and restricting the landing weight as Jon suggests. What are your
>thoughts?
>Regards,
>John Stiegelmeyer
>Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
>www.vansaircraft.net
>Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "JStiegel" <boe717@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:47 am PDT Link
Builders,
In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the MGTOW
(maximum gross takeoff weight) above 1800 to perhaps 2000. I
received advice
about lawyer stuff. Not meaning to flame anyone, but not interested
in that. I would like engineering talk. Example, I flew KC-135A
aircraft in the USAF with a MGTOW of 198,000 lbs. The airlines flew
these same water wagons at 255,000 I think. The landing gross weight
was the same at 155,000 lbs. for both. The biggest difference was
(1) the Air Force loaded their aircraft for War, and (2) they built
their own airports with 10,000 to 15,000 foot runways. Believe me I
have seen lots of takeoff runs exceeding 10,000 ft. By the way, some
of these same aircraft are still flying that I last flew in 1968.
Next -- when fuel became more expensive than 10 cents per gallon the
airlines were granted permission to make overweight landings. i.e.
more than the certificated landing gross of 155,000. This was not an
emergency landing, but an overweight landing - which required a
logbook anotation of if the landing was "Normal" as described by the
Captain -- as apposed to "Hard" which required a detailed maintenance
inspection.
The way to figure a larger gross weight is what I was asking. If it
is not possible -- that is what I want to know also.
Regards,
John Stiegelmeyer
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Wayne Reese" <waynereese@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 7:12 am PDT Link
John,
Did you drop 100,000 pounds? It has been a long time but 302,000 seems
like a familiar number.
Wayne
-----Original Message-----
From: JStiegel [mailto:boe717@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 11:33 PM
To: RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [RV7Yahoo] Gross Weight
Builders,
In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the MGTOW
(maximum gross takeoff weight) above 1800 to perhaps 2000. I
received advice
about lawyer stuff. Not meaning to flame anyone, but not interested
in that. I would like engineering talk. Example, I flew KC-135A
aircraft in the USAF with a MGTOW of 198,000 lbs. The airlines flew
these same water wagons at 255,000 I think. The landing gross weight
was the same at 155,000 lbs. for both. The biggest difference was
(1) the Air Force loaded their aircraft for War, and (2) they built
their own airports with 10,000 to 15,000 foot runways. Believe me I
have seen lots of takeoff runs exceeding 10,000 ft. By the way, some
of these same aircraft are still flying that I last flew in 1968.
Next -- when fuel became more expensive than 10 cents per gallon the
airlines were granted permission to make overweight landings. i.e.
more than the certificated landing gross of 155,000. This was not an
emergency landing, but an overweight landing - which required a
logbook anotation of if the landing was "Normal" as described by the
Captain -- as apposed to "Hard" which required a detailed maintenance
inspection.
The way to figure a larger gross weight is what I was asking. If it
is not possible -- that is what I want to know also.
Regards,
John Stiegelmeyer
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "vanlle2000" <vanlle2000@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 7:32 am PDT Link
There's probably a difference between airplanes that are desigtned to
be load-haulers and those that are designed as light, sporty craft.
In an RV-7, one of the problems is that to get to 2000 lbs (2000
lbs!) you will almost certainly be close to the aft CG llimit, just
because of the position of the seats/baggage. Two thousand pounds
and an aft CG is going to make it unpleasant to fly and make it come
down like an anvil.
I've flown these things long enough to know that the key to making
them fly up to their capability is to keep them light. I just wince
when I see 1150-1200 lb empty weights because I know the builders
will never know how good it could have been.--- In
RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> Builders,
> In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
MGTOW
> (maximum gross takeoff weight) above 1800 to perhaps 2000. I
> received advice
> about lawyer stuff. Not meaning to flame anyone, but not
interested
> in that. I would like engineering talk. Example, I flew KC-135A
> aircraft in the USAF with a MGTOW of 198,000 lbs. The airlines
flew
> these same water wagons at 255,000 I think. The landing gross
weight
> was the same at 155,000 lbs. for both. The biggest difference was
> (1) the Air Force loaded their aircraft for War, and (2) they built
> their own airports with 10,000 to 15,000 foot runways. Believe me
I
> have seen lots of takeoff runs exceeding 10,000 ft. By the way,
some
> of these same aircraft are still flying that I last flew in 1968.
>
> Next -- when fuel became more expensive than 10 cents per gallon
the
> airlines were granted permission to make overweight landings. i.e.
> more than the certificated landing gross of 155,000. This was not
an
> emergency landing, but an overweight landing - which required a
> logbook anotation of if the landing was "Normal" as described by
the
> Captain -- as apposed to "Hard" which required a detailed
maintenance
> inspection.
>
> The way to figure a larger gross weight is what I was asking. If
it
> is not possible -- that is what I want to know also.
>
> Regards,
> John Stiegelmeyer
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Martin Gomez" <mlg28@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 8:45 am PDT Link
John,
The effects of increasing gross weight have to be engineered, as you're implying. It's not a
matter of opinion, it's a matter of calculation. Many of us on this list, including me, can
perform at least some of those calculations, but it's time-consuming. Also, those
calculations need to be seeded with numbers which are a little hard to come by.
My boss (PhD in aero engineering from MIT) once said to me "If you can't calculate it, you
don't know it," which is another way of saying what Lord Kelvin said,
"When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in
numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot express it in
numbers your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may
be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts,
advanced to the stage of science"
William Thomson, Lord Kelvin (1891)
So, since I can't put numbers to it (yet), I don't want to feed you a line of fertilizer.
Just to give you an idea of what's involved:
In the area of performance:
- Rate of climb is excess power/weight. Excess power is the difference between power
available (i.e. engine power x prop efficiency) and power required (how many thrust HP it
takes to pull the airplane through the air), you can expect a big hit in ROC, since you're
increasing the power required, and increasing the weight in the denominator.
- Longer takeoff and landing distance. T/O will increase MORE than the weight increase:
the takeoff speed is higher, and the acceleration is lower, so it takes a more-than-linear
hit. Landing distance should increase roughly linearly with weight (i.e. touchdown speed
increases with the square root of weight, but energy to be dissipated goes with the square
of speed...so it ROUGHLY works out to linear...there is a non-linear aero drag term I'd have
to think about a bit).
In the area of handling qualities:
- Obviously, moving the CG will have a profound effect...no surprise.
- Assuming you can keep the same CG, a lot depends on where the weight goes. Mass
distribution affects not just the CG, but also the moment of inertia, which has a huge
effect on handling qualities. Not to mention spin qualities. Two one pound weights on
the end of a dumbell have a CG that's at the center of the barbell, but their moment of
inertia is much bigger than a two-lb weight at the center of the barbell.
In the area of structures:
- All the g-vs-weight math we threw around ignores the effect of mass distribution (one
person mentioned it). When engineers size (say) a wing spar, the distribution of weight
and lift plays a big role. Whether mass is in the fuselage or in the wing matters...weight in
the wings offsets the ending moment, whereas weight in the fuselage increases it.
...and there's a lot more...
So, sorry I can't be more help, but it's not a simple matter...and I don't want you to kill
yourself, whether or not your widow sues me.
Regards,
Martin
--- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> Builders,
> In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the MGTOW
> (maximum gross takeoff weight) above 1800 to perhaps 2000. I
> received advice
> about lawyer stuff. Not meaning to flame anyone, but not interested
> in that. I would like engineering talk. Example, I flew KC-135A
> aircraft in the USAF with a MGTOW of 198,000 lbs. The airlines flew
> these same water wagons at 255,000 I think. The landing gross weight
> was the same at 155,000 lbs. for both. The biggest difference was
> (1) the Air Force loaded their aircraft for War, and (2) they built
> their own airports with 10,000 to 15,000 foot runways. Believe me I
> have seen lots of takeoff runs exceeding 10,000 ft. By the way, some
> of these same aircraft are still flying that I last flew in 1968.
>
> Next -- when fuel became more expensive than 10 cents per gallon the
> airlines were granted permission to make overweight landings. i.e.
> more than the certificated landing gross of 155,000. This was not an
> emergency landing, but an overweight landing - which required a
> logbook anotation of if the landing was "Normal" as described by the
> Captain -- as apposed to "Hard" which required a detailed maintenance
> inspection.
>
> The way to figure a larger gross weight is what I was asking. If it
> is not possible -- that is what I want to know also.
>
> Regards,
> John Stiegelmeyer
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Bill Swaim" <bill@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:15 am PDT Link
Now that's 'engineering talk'! In matters such as this & in my work day to
day (ME), a half-assed answer is usually no answer at all.
Thanks Martin.............and thanks to Lord Kelvin.
Bill Swaim
RV7 - early wings
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Gomez [mailto:mlg28@cornell.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 10:34 AM
To: RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
John,
The effects of increasing gross weight have to be engineered, as you're
implying. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of calculation. Many
of us on this list, including me, can perform at least some of those
calculations, but it's time-consuming. Also, those calculations need to be
seeded with numbers which are a little hard to come by.
My boss (PhD in aero engineering from MIT) once said to me "If you can't
calculate it, you don't know it," which is another way of saying what Lord
Kelvin said,
"When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in
numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot express it in
numbers your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the
beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to
the stage of science"
William Thomson, Lord Kelvin (1891)
So, since I can't put numbers to it (yet), I don't want to feed you a line
of fertilizer.
Just to give you an idea of what's involved:
In the area of performance:
- Rate of climb is excess power/weight. Excess power is the difference
between power available (i.e. engine power x prop efficiency) and power
required (how many thrust HP it takes to pull the airplane through the air),
you can expect a big hit in ROC, since you're increasing the power required,
and increasing the weight in the denominator.
- Longer takeoff and landing distance. T/O will increase MORE than the
weight increase:
the takeoff speed is higher, and the acceleration is lower, so it takes a
more-than-linear hit. Landing distance should increase roughly linearly
with weight (i.e. touchdown speed increases with the square root of weight,
but energy to be dissipated goes with the square of speed...so it ROUGHLY
works out to linear...there is a non-linear aero drag term I'd have to think
about a bit).
In the area of handling qualities:
- Obviously, moving the CG will have a profound effect...no surprise.
- Assuming you can keep the same CG, a lot depends on where the weight goes.
Mass distribution affects not just the CG, but also the moment of inertia,
which has a huge effect on handling qualities. Not to mention spin
qualities. Two one pound weights on the end of a dumbell have a CG that's
at the center of the barbell, but their moment of inertia is much bigger
than a two-lb weight at the center of the barbell.
In the area of structures:
- All the g-vs-weight math we threw around ignores the effect of mass
distribution (one person mentioned it). When engineers size (say) a wing
spar, the distribution of weight and lift plays a big role. Whether mass is
in the fuselage or in the wing matters...weight in the wings offsets the
ending moment, whereas weight in the fuselage increases it.
...and there's a lot more...
So, sorry I can't be more help, but it's not a simple matter...and I don't
want you to kill yourself, whether or not your widow sues me.
Regards,
Martin
--- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> Builders,
> In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the MGTOW
> (maximum gross takeoff weight) above 1800 to perhaps 2000. I received
> advice about lawyer stuff. Not meaning to flame anyone, but not
> interested in that. I would like engineering talk. Example, I flew
> KC-135A aircraft in the USAF with a MGTOW of 198,000 lbs. The
> airlines flew these same water wagons at 255,000 I think. The landing
> gross weight was the same at 155,000 lbs. for both. The biggest
> difference was
> (1) the Air Force loaded their aircraft for War, and (2) they built
> their own airports with 10,000 to 15,000 foot runways. Believe me I
> have seen lots of takeoff runs exceeding 10,000 ft. By the way, some
> of these same aircraft are still flying that I last flew in 1968.
>
> Next -- when fuel became more expensive than 10 cents per gallon the
> airlines were granted permission to make overweight landings. i.e.
> more than the certificated landing gross of 155,000. This was not an
> emergency landing, but an overweight landing - which required a
> logbook anotation of if the landing was "Normal" as described by the
> Captain -- as apposed to "Hard" which required a detailed maintenance
> inspection.
>
> The way to figure a larger gross weight is what I was asking. If it
> is not possible -- that is what I want to know also.
>
> Regards,
> John Stiegelmeyer
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make
a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "JStiegel" <boe717@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:20 am PDT Link
--- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> Builders,
> In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
MGTOW
> (maximum gross takeoff weight) above 1800 to perhaps 2000. I
> received advice
> about lawyer stuff. Not meaning to flame anyone, but not
interested
> in that. I would like engineering talk. Example, I flew KC-135A
> aircraft in the USAF with a MGTOW of 198,000 lbs. The airlines
flew
> these same water wagons at 255,000 I think. The landing gross
weight
Sorry I should have written 298,000 MTOGW not 198,000. Old timer
disease.
Regards,
John Stiegelmeyer
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "pepeborja925mb" <pepeborja925mb@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:33 am PDT Link
<SNIP>In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
MGTOW (maximum gross takeoff weight) above 1800 to perhaps 2000. I
received advice about lawyer stuff.<SNIP>
Sorry about the lawyer advice. I did check the original question
and you asked for MGW not MGTOW, and that's why I wrote that it is
best to engrave the dataplate with Van's recommended weight and
avoid potential liability. I have been in this hobby since about
1993 and know two people in my area that have been sued over
homebuilts they sold (one involved a fatality). If it were me, I'd
not give additional ammo to a lawyer.
I believe the answers provided are for the benefit of everyone that
reads the message, not just the person doing the asking. This is a
learning experience for all. Can a -7 take off, fly, and land
safely at 2000#'s. Who knows and don't really care to find out
because it would be a pig to fly and pigs ain't fun to fly.
Jose.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Bob" <nutjob911@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 1:06 pm PDT Link
John: I take it you have not flown in a 7 or 7a yet. Weight and
weight placement is a huge deal.The envalope is huge 0-320,wood
prop,td to Io-360 c/s,nose wheel,Full tanks,empty tanks,The farther
aft cg is the more pitch sensitive the plane becomes.No one realy
wants to talk about it but its there.The landing gear on 7s,7a are
on the spindly side and will not take a lot of abuse and I think
you will find very few builders can carry 100lbs of baggage.Bottom
line keep it light,as much foward as possable,send the golf clubs
fedx.
Bob Hill
--- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> Builders,
> In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
MGTOW
> (maximum gross takeoff weight) above 1800 to perhaps 2000. I
> received advice
> about lawyer stuff. Not meaning to flame anyone, but not
interested
> in that. I would like engineering talk. Example, I flew KC-135A
> aircraft in the USAF with a MGTOW of 198,000 lbs. The airlines
flew
> these same water wagons at 255,000 I think. The landing gross
weight
> was the same at 155,000 lbs. for both. The biggest difference was
> (1) the Air Force loaded their aircraft for War, and (2) they
built
> their own airports with 10,000 to 15,000 foot runways. Believe me
I
> have seen lots of takeoff runs exceeding 10,000 ft. By the way,
some
> of these same aircraft are still flying that I last flew in 1968.
>
> Next -- when fuel became more expensive than 10 cents per gallon
the
> airlines were granted permission to make overweight landings.
i.e.
> more than the certificated landing gross of 155,000. This was not
an
> emergency landing, but an overweight landing - which required a
> logbook anotation of if the landing was "Normal" as described by
the
> Captain -- as apposed to "Hard" which required a detailed
maintenance
> inspection.
>
> The way to figure a larger gross weight is what I was asking. If
it
> is not possible -- that is what I want to know also.
>
> Regards,
> John Stiegelmeyer
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "JStiegel" <boe717@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 1:48 pm PDT Link
--- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> Builders,
> In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
MGTOW
Gentlemen: Thankyou. Now I have something to work with. The advice
of experience is worth more than gold.
Regards,
John Stiegelmeyer
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Steve Reamer" <steve@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 2:04 pm PDT Link
Anyone know where to purchase 4-40 nut plates..?
-----Original Message-----
From: JStiegel [mailto:boe717@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 4:43 PM
To: RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
--- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> Builders,
> In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
MGTOW
Gentlemen: Thankyou. Now I have something to work with. The advice
of experience is worth more than gold.
Regards,
John Stiegelmeyer
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: George Neal E Capt AU/PC <neal.george@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:10 pm PDT Link
Haire Aviation (eBay seller haireav), or [haireav@airmail.net].
Neal E. George, Capt, USAF
Air University Protocol
55 LeMay Plaza South
Maxwell AFB, AL 36112
(334) 953-2095 (DSN 943)
Fax (334) 953-2225
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Reamer [mailto:steve@merrittservices.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 3:54 PM
To: RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
Anyone know where to purchase 4-40 nut plates..?
-----Original Message-----
From: JStiegel [mailto:boe717@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 4:43 PM
To: RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
--- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> Builders,
> In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
MGTOW
Gentlemen: Thankyou. Now I have something to work with. The advice
of experience is worth more than gold.
Regards,
John Stiegelmeyer
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129gle56h/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705340085:HM/EXP=1097701471/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/compa
nion.yahoo.com> click here
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2128215/rand=359655801
_____
Yahoo! Groups Links
* To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe
* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Bill Swaim" <bill@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:11 pm PDT Link
Only place I know of is Cleaveland tool WH-200 or WHS-200 (SS) includes
screws, rivets & nut-plates (qty 100) $44.00
Bill Swaim
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Reamer [mailto:steve@merrittservices.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 3:54 PM
To: RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
Anyone know where to purchase 4-40 nut plates..?
-----Original Message-----
From: JStiegel [mailto:boe717@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 4:43 PM
To: RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
--- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> Builders,
> In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
MGTOW
Gentlemen: Thankyou. Now I have something to work with. The advice
of experience is worth more than gold.
Regards,
John Stiegelmeyer
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "John" <jadams@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:12 pm PDT Link
I took my excel spread sheet and configured a 7 to be nose heavy
with a CG forward of the max at 78.6 inches and a dry weight of
1090lbs. Then I loaded it to 2000 lbs, with a 100lbs in the baggage
area, 252lbs of fuel, 558 lbs of passengers (would they fit?). The
CG comes out 86.4 inches (aft and barely within the accepted range)
on take off. After buring 15 gals of fuel the CG moves aft of the
allowed range. I doubt there would be a safe way you could load
this airplane to 2000 lbs and fly it to a minimum safe fuel level
(5gal). The only way control the CG would be to figure out how to
get the extra 200 lbs packed right at the CG. Maybe you could get
200 lbs of gold bricks to sit under your knees at the wing spar.
Don't land it hard however. Some times it is fun to play "what if"
with a spread sheet.
JOhn Adams
> --- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> > Builders,
> > In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
> MGTOW
> Gentlemen: Thankyou. Now I have something to work with. The
advice
> of experience is worth more than gold.
> Regards,
> John Stiegelmeyer
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: Sam Buchanan <sbuc@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:12 pm PDT Link
Bob wrote:
> John: I take it you have not flown in a 7 or 7a yet. Weight and
> weight placement is a huge deal.The envalope is huge 0-320,wood
> prop,td to Io-360 c/s,nose wheel,Full tanks,empty tanks,The farther
> aft cg is the more pitch sensitive the plane becomes.No one realy
> wants to talk about it but its there.
The flight characteristics of an RV with aft CG are well known and have
been discussed many, many times. Matter of fact, RVers have been
discussing aft CGs since the first time somebody stuffed their 200 lb
buddy in the back seat of an RV-4! :-)
There are no dirty little secrets about flying an RV with the CG at or
beyond aft limit. Load up the baggage compartment of an RV-4, -6, -7, or
-9, add a Bubba-sized passenger, fly the tanks down to a few gallons and
you will find out what "neutral pitch stability" means.
My first eye-opening experience with flying an RV-6 with the CG "way
back there somewhere" was in 2000 and described in this article:
http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/west_trip.html
When I mentioned my experience to Mike Seager, he stated that when 'Ol
Red (his dear departed RV-6 that introduced so many of us to
RV-dom....RIP....) was loaded with passenger and baggage for his
frequent xcountry flights, that he had to "fly the plane all the time". :-)
What Mike was describing was feeling the control stick go limp in pitch.
Move the stick a 1/2", and instead of returning to neutral as is
customary, the stick stays put and the plane diverges from level flight.
Left alone long enough, it might even propagate into a quickly
increasing diversion to either extreme nose up or a dive. Needless to
stay, it would be a very bad idea to stall the plane with the CG that
far back.
So aft limits are there for a reason, but many RVs have been flown with
the CG farther back than is desirable. Just check out the tired-looking
guys unloading a *bunch* of stuff at OSH...... :-)
The landing gear on 7s,7a are
> on the spindly side and will not take a lot of abuse and I think
> you will find very few builders can carry 100lbs of baggage.
Once again, oh well, just refer back to the diatribe above..... ;-)
Bottom
> line keep it light,as much foward as possable,send the golf clubs
> fedx.
Not a bad idea.
Sam Buchanan
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 5:29 pm PDT Link
> 1090lbs. Then I loaded it to 2000 lbs, with a 100lbs in the baggage
> area, 252lbs of fuel, 558 lbs of passengers (would they fit?). The
> CG comes out 86.4 inches (aft and barely within the accepted range)
> on take off. After buring 15 gals of fuel the CG moves aft of the
http://www.rvproject.com/wab.html
That's the weight & balance calculator for my -7. Enter the exact scenario
you mentioned. Other than being over gross (my max gross is 1950), the CG
never leaves the envelope. Even with NO FUEL remaining the CG is still
forward of the aft limit!
Van's will tell you all day long they don't recommend the 200hp powerplant.
As I pull away from lower powered RVs, and as I appreciate the CG
characteristics, I have no doubt that FOR ME, at least, I made the right
decision. The heavy engine and prop come in handy...for performance & for
CG/feel.
I kept my airframe relatively "light." It's 1132 empty. That's on the
heavy side as far as RVs go historically, but compared to many of the 180hp
equipped RV-6s here in SoCal (which average 1150 or so), it's on the light
side when you consider my engine weighs 40 pounds more than theirs. Where's
the difference? A minimalist's interior, no vacuum system, and no
paint/primer on the skins. At least that's where I *think* I managed to
keep it "light."
Maximum performance and flexibility. Where's the down side? Money? Yep,
it cost a few grand more for the big engine. Worth it in my book.
Babble on...
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "John" <jadams@esophyx.com>
To: <RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 2:44 PM
Subject: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
> I took my excel spread sheet and configured a 7 to be nose heavy
> with a CG forward of the max at 78.6 inches and a dry weight of
> allowed range. I doubt there would be a safe way you could load
> this airplane to 2000 lbs and fly it to a minimum safe fuel level
> (5gal). The only way control the CG would be to figure out how to
> get the extra 200 lbs packed right at the CG. Maybe you could get
> 200 lbs of gold bricks to sit under your knees at the wing spar.
> Don't land it hard however. Some times it is fun to play "what if"
> with a spread sheet.
> JOhn Adams
> > --- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> > > Builders,
> > > In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
> > MGTOW
> > Gentlemen: Thankyou. Now I have something to work with. The
> advice
> > of experience is worth more than gold.
> > Regards,
> > John Stiegelmeyer
> Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
> www.vansaircraft.net
> Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Chuck Stuhrenberg" <cs@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 5:29 pm PDT Link
John,
Great info. Have you run the numbers at 1800 lbs.
Also I'd like to hear from members who have flown in both RV7s and
RV6s and compare the CG idiosyncrasies between the two.
Chuck Stuhrenberg
--- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jadams@e...> wrote:
> I took my excel spread sheet and configured a 7 to be nose heavy
> with a CG forward of the max at 78.6 inches and a dry weight of
> 1090lbs. Then I loaded it to 2000 lbs, with a 100lbs in the
baggage
> area, 252lbs of fuel, 558 lbs of passengers (would they fit?). The
> CG comes out 86.4 inches (aft and barely within the accepted range)
> on take off. After buring 15 gals of fuel the CG moves aft of the
> allowed range. I doubt there would be a safe way you could load
> this airplane to 2000 lbs and fly it to a minimum safe fuel level
> (5gal). The only way control the CG would be to figure out how to
> get the extra 200 lbs packed right at the CG. Maybe you could get
> 200 lbs of gold bricks to sit under your knees at the wing spar.
> Don't land it hard however. Some times it is fun to play "what if"
> with a spread sheet.
> JOhn Adams
> > --- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> > > Builders,
> > > In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
> > MGTOW
> > Gentlemen: Thankyou. Now I have something to work with. The
> advice
> > of experience is worth more than gold.
> > Regards,
> > John Stiegelmeyer
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: Sid Lambert <rv7@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 7:15 pm PDT Link
Is there much of a difference between the flip-up and slider in regards
to weight / cg?
Sid Lambert
RV-7 Emp
On Oct 12, 2004, at 8:25 PM, Chuck Stuhrenberg wrote:
> John,
>
> Great info. Have you run the numbers at 1800 lbs.
>
> Also I'd like to hear from members who have flown in both RV7s and
> RV6s and compare the CG idiosyncrasies between the two.
>
> Chuck Stuhrenberg
>
> --- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jadams@e...> wrote:
> > I took my excel spread sheet and configured a 7 to be nose heavy
> > with a CG forward of the max at 78.6 inches and a dry weight of
> > 1090lbs. Then I loaded it to 2000 lbs, with a 100lbs in the
> baggage
> > area, 252lbs of fuel, 558 lbs of passengers (would they fit?). The
> > CG comes out 86.4 inches (aft and barely within the accepted range)
> > on take off. After buring 15 gals of fuel the CG moves aft of the
> > allowed range. I doubt there would be a safe way you could load
> > this airplane to 2000 lbs and fly it to a minimum safe fuel level
> > (5gal). The only way control the CG would be to figure out how to
> > get the extra 200 lbs packed right at the CG. Maybe you could get
> > 200 lbs of gold bricks to sit under your knees at the wing spar.
> > Don't land it hard however. Some times it is fun to play "what if"
> > with a spread sheet.
> > JOhn Adams
> > > --- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> > > > Builders,
> > > > In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
> > > MGTOW
> > > Gentlemen: Thankyou. Now I have something to work with. The
> > advice
> > > of experience is worth more than gold.
> > > Regards,
> > > John Stiegelmeyer
> Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
> www.vansaircraft.net
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> ADVERTISEMENT
> <f2_free2_300x250_def_0904.gif>
> <l.gif>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> • To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
>
> • To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> • Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "maxwelltl54" <heirloomi@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 7:16 pm PDT Link
Good info. This all makes perfect sense to me. Not that I understand
all the numbers but my intuition can handle what you said here.
Where were you when I asked a similar question and go it slammed down
my throat :) Thanks!
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "maxwelltl54" <heirloomi@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 7:16 pm PDT Link
Again, great information. This is stuff people can really use rather
than talking about lawyers and accusations of being a poor pilot,
etc. I appreciate you taking the time to run the numbers for us.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Martin Gomez" <mlg28@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 8:20 pm PDT Link
Too busy with the ensuing flame war!
-----------------------------------
Martin Gomez
MLG28@cornell.edu
Northern Virginia, USA
RV-7 Empennage, 28 hrs of building to date
On Wednesday, October 13, 2004, maxwelltl54 wrote:
>Where were you when I asked a similar question and go it slammed down
>my throat :)
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Kyle Boatright" <kboatright1@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 8:21 pm PDT Link
Chuck & Others..
I have an 0-320/wood prop RV-6 with a Prestolite starter that both starts the airplane and adds 10 pounds of ballast up front. The empty CG and gross weight are 71 inches & 1031 lbs. (Note, the CG stations for the -7 are different than the -6, so no need to compare). The aft CG limit on the airplane is 76.8 inches. The gross weight on my airplane is set at 1675 lbs. With 550 lbs of passengers (not likely) and full fuel, the airplane is grossed out, but cannot approach the aft CG limit. With 550 lbs of passengers and no fuel, it is still inside the CG envelope.
Since I live in Atlanta, GA and my in-laws are about 540 miles away, near Dallas TX, that is my typical cross country flight. It takes 3.5 hours, with no wind. If I fly with 75 pounds of bags and 335 pounds of people, the airplane hits the aft CG limit with 11 gallons of fuel remaining. That gives 3+ hours of flight time, which is plenty for my bladder and butt. If I need to push to 4 hours, I kindly ask the passenger (my wife) to hold a bag in her lap during the approach and landing phase. To avoid this, I try to keep the baggage to under 65 lbs, which allows me to run the tanks dry and be within the CG range.
I will point out that the airplane flys noticably different at the aft CG limit... In landing configuration (full flaps, power at idle), I barely need any nose-up trim to maintain 75 knots when the airplane is at the aft limit. In fun flying mode (i.e. solo, medium/light weight, no baggage), the airplane requires full nose up trim to maintain the same speed.
KB
----- Original Message -----
From: Chuck Stuhrenberg
To: RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 8:25 PM
Subject: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
John,
Great info. Have you run the numbers at 1800 lbs.
Also I'd like to hear from members who have flown in both RV7s and
RV6s and compare the CG idiosyncrasies between the two.
Chuck Stuhrenberg
--- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jadams@e...> wrote:
> I took my excel spread sheet and configured a 7 to be nose heavy
> with a CG forward of the max at 78.6 inches and a dry weight of
> 1090lbs. Then I loaded it to 2000 lbs, with a 100lbs in the
baggage
> area, 252lbs of fuel, 558 lbs of passengers (would they fit?). The
> CG comes out 86.4 inches (aft and barely within the accepted range)
> on take off. After buring 15 gals of fuel the CG moves aft of the
> allowed range. I doubt there would be a safe way you could load
> this airplane to 2000 lbs and fly it to a minimum safe fuel level
> (5gal). The only way control the CG would be to figure out how to
> get the extra 200 lbs packed right at the CG. Maybe you could get
> 200 lbs of gold bricks to sit under your knees at the wing spar.
> Don't land it hard however. Some times it is fun to play "what if"
> with a spread sheet.
> JOhn Adams
> > --- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> > > Builders,
> > > In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
> > MGTOW
> > Gentlemen: Thankyou. Now I have something to work with. The
> advice
> > of experience is worth more than gold.
> > Regards,
> > John Stiegelmeyer
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Bob" <nutjob911@...> Time: Tue Oct 12, 2004 8:43 pm PDT Link
Sam,Dan,John,Thank you ,hard numbers from flying ships are a lot
better than adding up numbers and running them, so many
hoses,starters,altenators,oil coolers unique to each ship ,it would
be great if someone could set up a data base in files of different
configurations. I did an hour in a 9 last year at Oswago Ny and loved
the way it felt.RV-9,0-320FP 3/4 tanks ,two 220lbs pound pilots.When
we stalled by the time we were at the horizon we were flying
again ,the pattern was in slow motion in a word "SWEET". This year I
was in the RV-7,td,0-320 fp,low fuel enough said,same 220lbs
pilots,stalls were abrupt, pitch sensitivity was a issue for me. I
could get use to it just not like a pa-28,landings in both were
power all the way down to the numbers. I loved both models and am
very happy I am building the 7a ,I just want to configure my ship
as light and balanced as possible.
Bob Hill
-- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "maxwelltl54" <heirloomi@a...> wrote:
> Again, great information. This is stuff people can really use
rather
> than talking about lawyers and accusations of being a poor pilot,
> etc. I appreciate you taking the time to run the numbers for us.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@...> Time: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:37 am PDT Link
> Is there much of a difference between the flip-up and slider in regards
> to weight / cg?
For the sake of argument, let's assume the weight of the plexi is identical
in both configurations. Let's look at the other differences:
- Roll bar -- The tip-up has a beefy aluminum roll bar structure, while the
slider has a fat steel bow and down tube. I have no idea how they compare
in weight, but I assume they're comparable.
- Frame -- The tip-up frame is aluminum and is very light. The steel frame
on the slider probably doesn't weigh any more than the tip-up.
- Tracks & latches -- The slider has 3 tracks, the tip-up has none...but the
tip-up has a latch bar running across in front of F-705, a side latch
mechanism, and thick angle under the corners of F-705. Probably about even.
- Fiberglass -- The tip-up has a fiberglass fairing at the front...but so
does the slider on the front of the windshield. The slider's fairing
extends up along the top of the windshield...but the tip-up often has a
fiberglass "targa strip" along the aft edge of the plexi (mine doesn't but
most seem to). Looks like this is probably a wash.
- Skirts -- The slider has aft skirts, the tip-up doesn't (it bolts right to
the top skin).
- Release mechanism -- The tip-up might have this (mine doesn't, but most
seem to), the slider doesn't.
- Ribs -- The front deck ribs are slightly different between the tip-up and
slider...but the slider has 3 smaller ribs to the tip-up's 2 larger ribs.
Probably a wash.
I would wager that the slider is ever so slightly heavier than the tip-up,
but it's probably negligible. Since the canopy sits more or less right on
the CG (center of mass, more or less), I gotta assume that canopy choice has
a negligible effect on the CG as well.
That's my thinking at least. Correct me if I'm wrong.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Chuck Stuhrenberg" <cs@...> Time: Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:49 am PDT Link
I have a free downloadable cg calculator that you can run on your
computer. It's for calculating your initial cg before you fly your
plane for the first time.
It's a http://rvparachutes.com
Click the link on the left side of the page.
Chuck Stuhrenberg
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rvparachutes/
http://rvparachutes.com
--- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "Bob" <nutjob911@c...> wrote:
> Sam,Dan,John,Thank you ,hard numbers from flying ships are a lot
> better than adding up numbers and running them, so many
> hoses,starters,altenators,oil coolers unique to each ship ,it would
> be great if someone could set up a data base in files of different
> configurations. I did an hour in a 9 last year at Oswago Ny and
loved
> the way it felt.RV-9,0-320FP 3/4 tanks ,two 220lbs pound
pilots.When
> we stalled by the time we were at the horizon we were flying
> again ,the pattern was in slow motion in a word "SWEET". This year
I
> was in the RV-7,td,0-320 fp,low fuel enough said,same 220lbs
> pilots,stalls were abrupt, pitch sensitivity was a issue for me. I
> could get use to it just not like a pa-28,landings in both were
> power all the way down to the numbers. I loved both models and am
> very happy I am building the 7a ,I just want to configure my ship
> as light and balanced as possible.
> Bob Hill
> -- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "maxwelltl54" <heirloomi@a...>
wrote:
> > Again, great information. This is stuff people can really use
> rather
> > than talking about lawyers and accusations of being a poor pilot,
> > etc. I appreciate you taking the time to run the numbers for us.
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "R. Slater" <rrslater1@...> Time: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:05 am PDT Link
Dan, when I flew with you how was the control feel with my size a** in the
plane compared to say your normal weighted plane? I am a big boy and we
must have been close to some limits. I can't remember how much fuel or what
if any baggage was in the back but our gross was up there.
Ryan
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Checkoway [mailto:dan@rvproject.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 3:28 PM
To: RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
> 1090lbs. Then I loaded it to 2000 lbs, with a 100lbs in the baggage
> area, 252lbs of fuel, 558 lbs of passengers (would they fit?). The
> CG comes out 86.4 inches (aft and barely within the accepted range)
> on take off. After buring 15 gals of fuel the CG moves aft of the
http://www.rvproject.com/wab.html
That's the weight & balance calculator for my -7. Enter the exact
scenario
you mentioned. Other than being over gross (my max gross is 1950), the CG
never leaves the envelope. Even with NO FUEL remaining the CG is still
forward of the aft limit!
Van's will tell you all day long they don't recommend the 200hp
powerplant.
As I pull away from lower powered RVs, and as I appreciate the CG
characteristics, I have no doubt that FOR ME, at least, I made the right
decision. The heavy engine and prop come in handy...for performance & for
CG/feel.
I kept my airframe relatively "light." It's 1132 empty. That's on the
heavy side as far as RVs go historically, but compared to many of the
180hp
equipped RV-6s here in SoCal (which average 1150 or so), it's on the light
side when you consider my engine weighs 40 pounds more than theirs.
Where's
the difference? A minimalist's interior, no vacuum system, and no
paint/primer on the skins. At least that's where I *think* I managed to
keep it "light."
Maximum performance and flexibility. Where's the down side? Money? Yep,
it cost a few grand more for the big engine. Worth it in my book.
Babble on...
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "John" <jadams@esophyx.com>
To: <RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 2:44 PM
Subject: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
> I took my excel spread sheet and configured a 7 to be nose heavy
> with a CG forward of the max at 78.6 inches and a dry weight of
> allowed range. I doubt there would be a safe way you could load
> this airplane to 2000 lbs and fly it to a minimum safe fuel level
> (5gal). The only way control the CG would be to figure out how to
> get the extra 200 lbs packed right at the CG. Maybe you could get
> 200 lbs of gold bricks to sit under your knees at the wing spar.
> Don't land it hard however. Some times it is fun to play "what if"
> with a spread sheet.
> JOhn Adams
> > --- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> > > Builders,
> > > In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
> > MGTOW
> > Gentlemen: Thankyou. Now I have something to work with. The
> advice
> > of experience is worth more than gold.
> > Regards,
> > John Stiegelmeyer
> Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
> www.vansaircraft.net
> Yahoo! Groups Links
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.774 / Virus Database: 521 - Release Date: 10/7/2004
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Author: "Dan Checkoway" <dan@...> Time: Wed Oct 13, 2004 11:58 am PDT Link
We had almost full fuel at the beginning of the flight, and just my 10 pound
bag of tools behind my seat. The pitch feel was normal -- I did have more
nose-down trim in than I would with just me, but it didn't take much.
Loading the seats doesn't have as much as an impact in my plane as loading
the baggage compartment does.
The biggest factor with 2 big dudes in the plane is comfort, in my opinion.
Stick motion was a little limited, which I noticed as the tail came down and
I pulled the stick all the way back (sorry nads). I've basically come up
with a policy then when I fly with big dudes, the passenger stick comes out
for takeoff and landing.
And I did notice that the plane was more sluggish when doing cross-unders in
formation...as we crossed behind Fred I would apply full power to ease back
forward into position, and it was less responsive than usual.
Roll was more sluggish, too, but sluggish in an RV doesn't really compare to
sluggish in a Cessna. 8^)
No big deal, all around -- comfort (elbow room) would be my biggest
complaint.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "R. Slater" <rrslater1@adelphia.net>
To: <RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 10:59 AM
Subject: RE: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
> Dan, when I flew with you how was the control feel with my size a** in the
> plane compared to say your normal weighted plane? I am a big boy and we
> must have been close to some limits. I can't remember how much fuel or
what
> if any baggage was in the back but our gross was up there.
>
> Ryan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Checkoway [mailto:dan@rvproject.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 3:28 PM
> To: RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
> > 1090lbs. Then I loaded it to 2000 lbs, with a 100lbs in the baggage
> > area, 252lbs of fuel, 558 lbs of passengers (would they fit?). The
> > CG comes out 86.4 inches (aft and barely within the accepted range)
> > on take off. After buring 15 gals of fuel the CG moves aft of the
>
> http://www.rvproject.com/wab.html
>
> That's the weight & balance calculator for my -7. Enter the exact
> scenario
> you mentioned. Other than being over gross (my max gross is 1950), the
CG
> never leaves the envelope. Even with NO FUEL remaining the CG is still
> forward of the aft limit!
>
> Van's will tell you all day long they don't recommend the 200hp
> powerplant.
> As I pull away from lower powered RVs, and as I appreciate the CG
> characteristics, I have no doubt that FOR ME, at least, I made the right
> decision. The heavy engine and prop come in handy...for performance &
for
> CG/feel.
>
> I kept my airframe relatively "light." It's 1132 empty. That's on the
> heavy side as far as RVs go historically, but compared to many of the
> 180hp
> equipped RV-6s here in SoCal (which average 1150 or so), it's on the
light
> side when you consider my engine weighs 40 pounds more than theirs.
> Where's
> the difference? A minimalist's interior, no vacuum system, and no
> paint/primer on the skins. At least that's where I *think* I managed to
> keep it "light."
>
> Maximum performance and flexibility. Where's the down side? Money?
Yep,
> it cost a few grand more for the big engine. Worth it in my book.
>
> Babble on...
>
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John" <jadams@esophyx.com>
> To: <RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 2:44 PM
> Subject: [RV7Yahoo] Re: Gross Weight
> > I took my excel spread sheet and configured a 7 to be nose heavy
> > with a CG forward of the max at 78.6 inches and a dry weight of
> > allowed range. I doubt there would be a safe way you could load
> > this airplane to 2000 lbs and fly it to a minimum safe fuel level
> > (5gal). The only way control the CG would be to figure out how to
> > get the extra 200 lbs packed right at the CG. Maybe you could get
> > 200 lbs of gold bricks to sit under your knees at the wing spar.
> > Don't land it hard however. Some times it is fun to play "what if"
> > with a spread sheet.
> > JOhn Adams
> > > --- In RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com, "JStiegel" <boe717@a...> wrote:
> > > > Builders,
> > > > In a previous post I asked if other builders had increased the
> > > MGTOW
> > > Gentlemen: Thankyou. Now I have something to work with. The
> > advice
> > > of experience is worth more than gold.
> > > Regards,
> > > John Stiegelmeyer
> > Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
> > www.vansaircraft.net
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
> www.vansaircraft.net
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> --
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.774 / Virus Database: 521 - Release Date: 10/7/2004
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
> www.vansaircraft.net
> Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1yWplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-
Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
www.vansaircraft.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RV7and7A/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RV7and7A-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/