REFLECTOR: Re: REFLECTOR Competition

jack davis n767sd at hotmail.com
Tue Jul 20 20:13:43 CDT 2004 

Keith,

Yes, I understand.  I felt the same way.  And, to tell you the truth, if you
don't mind limiting yourself to longer runways, then the fixed-pitch is fine
even at gross.

I was very fortunate in that I had a lycoming with a counter-weighted shaft,
so no RPM limitation on the CS prop.  I know others have suffered
significantly from this.

As for me, after flying for awhile, I'm now thinking about replacing my
entire panel with a glass cockpit.  One lesson I think we all know is that
with experimentals, they're never done!

Happy building . . .

Jack
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "KeithHallsten" <KeithHallsten at quiknet.com>
To: "Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list" <reflector at tvbf.org>
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 11:37 PM
Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: Re: REFLECTOR Competition


> Jack,
>
> I appreciate your informed perspective!  I really do appreciate your
> experience and advice, since I'm one of those guys who has a "not yet
> flying" Velocity.  I am trying to limit the number of changes, but I also
> need to feel comfortable with the design - after all, it's my neck!!
>
> I did recently order a Catto prop, but I'm under no illusion that it will
be
> equivalent to a CS prop, especially in takeoff distance and air braking.
I
> just could not get comfortable with the current options for CS propos, so
> I'm trying to keep the project moving and get other systems de-bugged
while
> I continue to watch the CS prop market.  This will also provide me with a
> spare prop to use if and when the CS prop has to go in for overhaul or
> repair.  I'm based at an airport with a 6000-foot near-sea-level runway,
so
> I think the takeoff performance with the fixed-pitch prop will be
sufficient
> for the initial test flying phase.  After that, we will see!
>
> Keith Hallsten
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "jack davis" <n767sd at hotmail.com>
> To: "Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list" <reflector at tvbf.org>
> Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 7:56 PM
> Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: Re: REFLECTOR Competition
>
>
> > Scott,
> >
> > I couldn't agree more.  I'm amazed sometimes at the amount of
> "improvements"
> > that "need" to be made to the Velocity and usually from most who don't
> even
> > have a flyable Velocity.  Although I made changes to the plans to build
a
> > custom aircraft to my tastes, for the most part, I stuck to the basic
> plans
> > and had a flyable aircraft in less than 3.5 years of construction.  Many
> > times I see folks furiously debating "needed" changes on something that
I
> > know from experience doesn't need to be changed or will make little
> > difference when all is said and done.
> >
> > I guess it all depends on what your mission profile is for the Velocity.
> If
> > you want a show queen, then there is no limit on the "needed" changes.
If
> > you plan on using it for serious IFR, then you really only know the
> > limitations of the design after flying it for a while in actual
> conditions.
> >
> > >From my perspective (with about 500 hours on my Velocity now) and from
my
> > mission profile, I wish my Velocity was super or turbocharged, had
de-ice,
> > and I wish I built the XL rather than the Standard.  I definitely know I
> > need a two-axis autopilot which will reduce the workload tremendously on
> > those ILS approaches to minimums.  I also know that I'm installing
> > downlinked weather for the cockpit.
> >
> > As another example, I guarantee that those folks that say they don't
want
> to
> > "waste" their money on a constant speed prop are going to wish they
didn't
> > waste money on a fixed pitch prop after they fly it for awhile.  That's
> just
> > experience talking . . . How do I know?  Because I was the same person
> > saying the same thing before my Velocity was flying.  I also had people
> with
> > flying Velocities tell me that I needed a CS prop, but I wouldn't
believe
> > them until I ended up spending money on a fixed pitched prop only to
> > purchase a CS later.  Did I like spending nearly $3K on a fixed pitched
> prop
> > plus $10K + on a CS?  No, but that was what was needed.  Unfortunately,
> > humans rarely heed advise from those with experience.  Those not flying
> will
> > just have to learn by doing, even if that means redoing things that
could
> > have been done right the first time.
> >
> > Jack
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Scott Baker" <sbakr at comcast.net>
> > To: "Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list" <reflector at tvbf.org>
> > Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 8:12 PM
> > Subject: REFLECTOR: Re: REFLECTOR Competition
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Two short stories about the time it takes to build a Velocity ...
> > > #1 - A close friend and builder of his own Velocity aircraft would
often
> > be
> > > approached at air shows by aircraft builders who were still working on
> > their
> > > projects.  Inevitably these builders would say, "I like (a feature on
my
> > > friend's aircraft), but I'm gonna do (this or that - sometimes for
> > > one-upmanship, sometimes to make 'improvements') on mine".  My friend
> > > quickly grew tired of all the talk and would say, "Yeah, yeah, yeah
..
> > tell
> > > me after you're done and flying.  Until then, don't bother me."  To
him
> > > there are "dreamers" and "doers" - and he obviously had more patience
> for
> > > folks who pushed to fulfill their dreams in the form of a finished
> > aircraft,
> > > rather than for folks who were always "dreaming" and never "doing".
> > > #2 - I was conducting a tour of the Velocity factory and Service
Center
> > > recently to an enthusiastic couple.  While walking between buildings
the
> > > husband asked, "How long does it take to complete work on a Velocity?"
> I
> > > half jokingly said, "That depends on your profession.  If you are a
> Rough
> > > Carpenter, you'll be finished within a year.  And if you're an
Engineer,
> > > you'll never finish because you'll spend 8-hours studying and planning
> for
> > > each 5-minute job".  You guessed it, he was an engineer.  He laughed
and
> > > said, "You're right ... I guess it's in the blood."
> > > There is, of course, a happy medium.  Some people enjoy the endless
> > > possibilities of making changes and "improvements".  These folks
should
> > not
> > > complain or get down on themselves when the job takes a long time.
> > > I've seen others who feel that they "must" make custom changes - not
> > because
> > > of a demonstrated need - or even because they "want to" - it's as if
> some
> > > unknown force is affecting them, compelling them, to make changes.
> These
> > > people become frustrated when the job takes longer than expected.
> > > I think there is a strong element of wisdom to what Lynn has to say.
> > > If the goal is to finish and fly - then get out there and do a little
> > > something every day.  If you are thinking of making changes, realize
> that
> > > this adds to the building time - and that quite often, one "little"
> change
> > > affects other areas - which then requires changes to accommodate the
> first
> > > change (domino effect).  Do yourself a favor and ask, "Is this change
> > really
> > > necessary?"
> > > If so - be true to yourself and proceed.  If not, why not save some
(or
> a
> > > lot) of time and "pass".  Some of the best examples of Velocity
> > workmanship
> > > involve simple, straightforward design features.  It doesn't have to
be
> > > complicated to be "done right".
> > > If you're a person who enjoys building - perhaps more than flying -
then
> > the
> > > journey is the destination.  Have fun!  And save a hot tub seat for
me!
> > > Scott B.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > From: "Lynn Gallup" <LGallup at mn.rr.com>
> > > To: "Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list" <reflector at tvbf.org>
> > > Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 7:01 PM
> > > Subject: REFLECTOR: Re: REFLECTOR Competition
> > >
> > >
> > > > Greg,
> > > > I think I was about seven years into my Velocity project when I
began
> to
> > > > seriously doubt if I would ever finish it. I then made a few
decisions
> > > about
> > > > my approach to the project which I hoped would put the odds in my
> favor.
> > > One
> > > > of them was to temporarily unsubscribe myself from all aviation
> internet
> > > > forums (like this one). Another was to end any more thoughts
> concerning
> > > > "improvements" to the design. A third was to call the factory and
> speak
> > to
> > > > Scott or Duane Swing after a "reasonable" period of unsuccessfully
> > trying
> > > to
> > > > figure something out for myself (I defined "reasonable" as anything
in
> > > > excess of two hours.).
> > > >
> > > > Only after I had flown it about 100 hours did I begin to think of
> > > > improvements or added features. But retrofits are often tough to
> > impliment
> > > > which is a plus for minimizing downtime and maximizing flying hours.
> > > >
> > > > The result? I now have 310 hours flying a really sound airplane in
> which
> > I
> > > > have the highest confidence. To all I say "Forget the interesting
> > > > competitivness of the Reflector and GET BUILDING!" (It's all in the
> > > > instruction manual anyway.)
> > > > Lynn
> > > > ===========================================
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > > From: "Greg Poole" <gpoole at zeta.org.au>
> > > > To: <alex157 at direcway.com>; "Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders
> list"
> > > > <reflector at tvbf.org>
> > > > Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 4:26 AM
> > > > Subject: REFLECTOR: Re: REFLECTOR Competition
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Boy what a competitive lot of builders we have ...IVO vs MT vs
> Catto,
> > > Mags
> > > > > vs electronic ignition, Lyco power vs Sub vs GM vs rotary....
seems
> > > > > everybody needs to back their own MO!  Sure makes it interesting
for
> > us
> > > > > fence sitters!
> > > > >
> > > > > I am also on the BearHawk list (nice place but an entirely
different
> > > > mission
> > > > > capability/role and a '60's look) and one of the plan builders
there
> > was
> > > > > really letting loose on glass planes by saying how glad he was to
be
> > > > flying
> > > > > low and slow and using this as the basis for reasoning that this
was
> > the
> > > > > reason he would live a much longer and safer life based on the
> > accident
> > > > > records of fast glass such as Lancairs etc.  I pointed out the
lack
> of
> > > > > objectivity in his analysis and reasoning but he could not be
> swayed.
> > > > Seems
> > > > > we glass plane builders are far more ready to fly through cloud
and
> > > storms
> > > > > trying to outrun the weather to get home first than they that fly
> STOL
> > > > > types. Didn't occur to him that with a bit more speed, we probably
> can
> > > > give
> > > > > storm cells a wider berth and get landed and in the hangar than
> those
> > > > > bumping along at 120kts.
> > > > >
> > > > > To each his own I say....trouble is I love so many mission
> > capabilities
> > > > that
> > > > > I want one of every type!
> > > > >
> > > > > ....I'll finish my Velocity first though!
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > >
> > > > > Greg.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > > > From: "Alex Balic" <alex157 at direcway.com>
> > > > > To: <Jim_Agnew_2 at yahoo.com>; "Velocity Aircraft Owners and
Builders
>
> > > list"
> > > > > <reflector at tvbf.org>
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 2:37 PM
> > > > > Subject: RE: REFLECTOR: new electronic ign.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Jim-
> > > > > > That is exactly why mags are used on racing engines, because at
> high
> > > RPM
> > > > > > they generate a ton of power, more than an electronic unit
can...
> > > > problem
> > > > > is
> > > > > > at 2500 rpm, they are pretty weak. I am interested that yours
can
> > > throw
> > > > a
> > > > > 1"
> > > > > > spark - I don't have my formula handy, but at sea level, dry
air,
> I
> > > > would
> > > > > > think that it would require several thousand volts- do they use
a
> > > > > capacitor
> > > > > > in the high altitude units? I though that they were just better
> > > > insulated
> > > > > to
> > > > > > prevent internal arcing at altitude..... I suppose that if there
> is
> > > > enough
> > > > > > spring tension on that impulse coupler that it could simulate
> > > > momentarily,
> > > > > > several thousand RPM though........ I have been a grounding
source
> > for
> > > a
> > > > > > magneto in the past, it wasn't a fun experience that I want to
> > repeat,
> > > > but
> > > > > > once again, it happened when the coupler tripped, and the speed
> > could
> > > > have
> > > > > > been pretty high....
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: reflector-bounces at tvbf.org
> > [mailto:reflector-bounces at tvbf.org]On
> > > > > > Behalf Of Jim Agnew
> > > > > > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 9:11 PM
> > > > > > To: Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list
> > > > > > Subject: RE: REFLECTOR: new electronic ign.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Scott,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have Bendix high altitude mags on my IO-360 and if you
> > > > > > turn the prop by hand the impulse coupled mag will throw a
> > > > > > 3/4-1" spark so I doubt if .035" would bother them.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On AA Fuel dragsters the cylinders are filled with an
> > > > > > almost liquid mixture and they use mags to fire it!! and at
> > > > > > 10K+ RPM.  The problem with mags is their lack of automatic
> > > > > > spark advance that gives the electronic ignitions an
> > > > > > advantage.  They solved this in cars in the 40s so this
> > > > > > isn't exactly a new development.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > BTW it is said that the mags on those dragsters at top RPMs
> > > > > > produce a spark of 42 AMPS so if you think that mags have a
> > > > > > weak spark at high rpms you are wrong.  The mag output is
> > > > > > weak at low rpms and increases as rpms increase.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jim
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- Scott Derrick <scott at tnstaafl.net> wrote:
> > > > > > > WHile there may be mags with a good spark, you won't find
> > > > > > > one on an
> > > > > > > airplane.   THe spark is absolutly lousy.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I gap the plugs on my one slick mag at 18, I gap my plugs
> > > > > > > on my lightspeed
> > > > > > > at 35.  Hmmm.. WHy?  Reason is the mags are so weak any
> > > > > > > larger gap will
> > > > > > > just arc across the points in the mag instead of the
> > > > > > > plug.  The lightspeed
> > > > > > > on the other hand has a very hot spark that can jum the
> > > > > > > 35 gap with ease.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I can run my engine on one mag and loose, minimum 25%
> > > > > > > power, closer to
> > > > > > > 35%, I can run on the lightspeed and loose at the most
> > > > > > > 10%, probably
> > > > > > > closer to 5%.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > WHen I do a mag check I drop 75 rpm when running on the
> > > > > > > mag, I drop less
> > > > > > > than 10 rpm when shutting the mag off.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Mags suck in all respects except one, they don't need any
> > > > > > > external power.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Mags fail all the time and have very short lives. The TBF
> > > > > > > for a well
> > > > > > > designd EI is longer than the life of the plane.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Scott
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Mags do not have a lousy spark. They need two spark
> > > > > > > plugs per cylinder
> > > > > > > > because it is too big to combust properly with only one
> > > > > > > ignition point,
> > > > > > > > especially a 540. And you need two ignition units
> > > > > > > because anything can
> > > > > > > > and will eventually fail. Electronic units fail
> > > > > > > instantly instead of
> > > > > > > > running rough like an old style mag.  bg
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: reflector-bounces at tvbf.org
> > > > > > > [mailto:reflector-bounces at tvbf.org] On
> > > > > > > > Behalf Of Scott Derrick
> > > > > > > > Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2004 10:15 AM
> > > > > > > > To: Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: new electronic ign.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Try and remember: you do not have two mags because
> > > > > > > they give better
> > > > > > > >> ignition that way - they give lousy ignition the day
> > > > > > > you install them,
> > > > > > > >> and go downhill from there. You have two mags because
> > > > > > > one of them is
> > > > > > > >> *certain* to fail. One electronic unit provides better
> > > > > > > ignition (saves
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > While I agree that mags are much more failure prone
> > > > > > > than an EI and that
> > > > > > > > one of the reasons for two is redundency in case of
> > > > > > > failure.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Mags have a lousy spark and you will not get full power
> > > > > > > with just one.
> > > > > > > > two are required.  Even with EI's two plugs will
> > > > > > > provide a more complete
> > > > > > > > burn and more power than one.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Scott
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > To change your email address, visit
> > > > > > > > http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> > > > > > > > user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> > > > > > > > Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> > > > > > > > Check old archives:
> > > > > > > http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > To change your email address, visit
> > > > > > > > http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> > > > > > > > user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> > > > > > > > Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> > > > > > > > Check old archives:
> > > > > > > http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > To change your email address, visit
> > > > > > > http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> > > > > > > user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> > > > > > > Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> > > > > > > Check old archives:
> > > > > > > http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > =====
> > > > > > James F. Agnew
> > > > > > Jim_Agnew_2 at Yahoo.Com
> > > > > > Tampa, FL
> > > > > > Velocity 173 Elite Aircraft Completed & Flying
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > To change your email address, visit
> > > > > > http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> > > > > > user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> > > > > > Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> > > > > > Check old archives:
> > > http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > To change your email address, visit
> > > > > http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> > > > > > user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> > > > > > Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> > > > > > Check old archives:
> > > http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > To change your email address, visit
> > > > http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
> > > > >
> > > > > Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> > > > > user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> > > > > Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> > > > > Check old archives:
> > http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > To change your email address, visit
> > > http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
> > > >
> > > > Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> > > > user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> > > > Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> > > > Check old archives:
> http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > To change your email address, visit
> > http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
> > >
> > > Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> > > user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> > > Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> > > Check old archives:
http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > To change your email address, visit
> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
> >
> > Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> > user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> > Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> > Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To change your email address, visit
http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>
> Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>

More information about the Reflector mailing list