Matronics Email Lists Forum Index Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
 
 Get Email Distribution Too!Get Email Distribution Too!    FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Unuseable Full

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Albert Gardner



Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 455
Location: Yuma, AZ

PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:24 pm    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

I have 8 oz in one tank and 9 in the other of unusable full when tanks were
drained while sitting on the ramp. Aircraft was in level cruise flight and
tank was used in flight until fuel pressure started to drop. Switched tanks,
landed and drained tank. Very small amount of unusable fuel but makes me
aware of the need to frequently check tanks for water/other contamination.
Anyone else have numbers?
Albert Gardner
RV-10 N991RV
Yuma, AZ


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

_________________
RV-9A N872RV
RV-10 N991RV
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
fehdxlbb(at)gmail.com
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:44 pm    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

How much is unusable in a takeoff/go-around attitude? Or a cross-wind slip to landing? That's the value we all should really be seeking and using to flight plan.

Fly safe,
Jim

Sent from my iPhone

Quote:
On Mar 28, 2017, at 00:23, Albert <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com> wrote:



I have 8 oz in one tank and 9 in the other of unusable full when tanks were
drained while sitting on the ramp. Aircraft was in level cruise flight and
tank was used in flight until fuel pressure started to drop. Switched tanks,
landed and drained tank. Very small amount of unusable fuel but makes me
aware of the need to frequently check tanks for water/other contamination.
Anyone else have numbers?
Albert Gardner
RV-10 N991RV
Yuma, AZ









- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
flying-nut(at)cfl.rr.com
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 4:28 am    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

That might be good info but useless.   If you depart or land with that little fuel then you're obviously suicidal and in need of professional help.
IMHO of course!!!!
Linn


Sent from Samsung tablet cruising on the Oasis Of The Seas.
-------- Original message --------
From Jim Beyer <fehdxlbb(at)gmail.com>
Date: 03/28/2017 1:41 AM (GMT-05:00)
To rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject Re: RV10-List: Unuseable Full


--> RV10-List message posted by: Jim Beyer <fehdxlbb(at)gmail.com>

How much is unusable in a takeoff/go-around attitude?  Or a cross-wind slip to landing?  That's the value we all should really be seeking and using to flight plan.

Fly safe,
Jim

Sent from my iPhone

Quote:
On Mar 28, 2017, at 00:23, Albert <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com> wrote:

--> RV10-List message posted by: "Albert" <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com>

I have 8 oz in one tank and 9 in the other of unusable full when tanks were
drained while sitting on the ramp. Aircraft was in level cruise flight and
tank was used in flight until fuel pressure started to drop. Switched tanks,
landed and drained tank. Very small amount of unusable fuel  but makes me
aware of the need to frequently check tanks for water/other contamination.
Anyone else have numbers?
Albert Gardner
RV-10 N991RV
Yuma, AZ








_-============================================================
_-=          - The RV10-List Email Forum -
_-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
_-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
_-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
_-= Photoshare, and much much more:
_-=
_-=   --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
_-=
_-============================================================
_-=               - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
_-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
_-=
_-=   --> http://forums.matronics.com
_-=
_-============================================================
_-=              - NEW MATRONICS LIST WIKI -
_-= Add some info to the Matronics Email List Wiki!
_-=   --> http://wiki.matronics.com
_-============================================================
_-=             - List Contribution Web Site -
_-=  Thank you for your generous support!
_-=                              -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
_-=   --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
_-============================================================


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
partner14



Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Posts: 540
Location: Granbury Texas

PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 4:51 am    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

Hopefully, if you're, for whatever reason, running right down to the last drop, you won't be doing anything wierd, other than landing the airplane.  I purposely ran a tank dry, at very low time, for 2 reasons, one, to find the usable fuel, the other to insure the engine would refire. The results were very comforting;  could barely fill 1/4 of the plastic fuel tester, and the engine fired back up immediately, with no boost pump necessary.Although we tend to flight plan longer legs than most of our RV friends, it's still nowhere near 55 gallons.  Usually use 4 hours, and, if necessary, slightly longer, but only if there is/are other fuel choices closer in case fuel burn is higher and/or speed is much slower.  We are very blessed to be flying a fast and efficient plane, which makes flight planning a whole lot easier.I usually start the flight planning at around 600nm..... looking for the cheapest fuel, at the highest possible airport.  You'll save fuel and time being able to decend and climb out 5,000' instead of 10,000'. Don McDonaldComing up on 1,000 hours and still enjoying every damn minute.In an attempt to share the fun, I now have had over 275 "different" passengers.

From: Jim Beyer <fehdxlbb(at)gmail.com>
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 12:52 AM
Subject: Re: Unuseable Full



How much is unusable in a takeoff/go-around attitude?  Or a cross-wind slip to landing?  That's the value we all should really be seeking and using to flight plan.

Fly safe,
Jim

Sent from my iPhone

[quote] On Mar 28, 2017, at 00:23, Albert <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com> wrote:



I have 8 oz in one tank and 9 in the other of unusable full when tanks were
drained while sitting on the ramp. Aircraft was in level cruise flight and
tank was used in flight until fuel pressure started to drop. Switched tanks,
landed and drained tank. Very small amount of unusable fuel  but makes me
aware of the need to frequently check tanks for water/other contamination


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

_________________
Don A. McDonald
40636
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tim Olson



Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2871

PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 5:20 am    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

I somewhat agree. I think Jim's general concept is correct...you
wouldn't want to flight plan with an amount of fuel that is
expected to be available but may not be under certain conditions.
But, at the same time, you can't really try to simulate the
most extreme situations and come up with a reliable number.

First, let me say that when I did my test, I got maybe a
pop-can's worth of fuel out after flying them empty.
That was in level flight. Also, I just saw someone posted
on the RV-14 forum that they got between .1 and .2 gallons
remaining doing the same thing. A pop can is 12oz, which
is also .1 gallons. So, we can basically know that
there is almost zero unusable fuel in the RV-10/14 design
of wing tanks. 12oz isn't enough for me to say counts
for anything. I certainly can't top my tanks off to within
12oz every time, given uneven pavement and such.
So in the RV-10, I just consider all fuel to be
labeled "useable".

But, the other thing we know about the RV-10 tanks is that
the fuel port is just a couple inches from the aft portion
of the tank near the spar, and it's on the flatter area of
the tank, not on the curved airfoil. So where Jim
says in a "takeoff/go-around situation", in the RV-10,
that is actually not where I would have my worry.
I think you could actually tap into that last little
bit of fuel better in climb-out, especially if you
mis-applied rudder enough to keep the fuel forced against
the bulkhead.

My big worry, and the reason I really don't fly it down
to less than 5 gallons per tank, has a few reasons:

1) with float error and such, I don't want to count on the
accuracy that low.

2) I have fuel low warnings that come on around 6-7
gallons (each side) if I remember right. If I go below
that, I'm going to be hitting mute a lot.

3) During landing, if you don't keep the rudder pressure
right, or have a crosswind that you have to correct for,
you could easily un-port that fuel port even with a couple
gallons in there.

4) This is the big one... In landing configuration, the
RV-10 tips quite a bit nose down if you are landing
with full flaps. (I almost always do) and you are far
more likely to un-port the fuel inlet when it all
sloshes forward in the tank.

So I really don't like the idea of trying to bring a plane
in at low fuel levels.

In teaching landings, BTW, we all know that there
are 2 ways to do the crosswind correction. I've been
teaching them a bunch lately. You can crab to landing
and then kick the rudder in just before you touch down,
or you can hold the slip correction all the way down final.
Another instructor I know does not even TEACH the former
method, and I am not thrilled by this. I specifically
teach my students that although the slip to final is
easier for initial learning, they will absolutely
want to work to perfect the crab and kick-in the rudder
method. It will be really the only way to help
guard against fuel un-porting in lower fuel situations,
and there are planes like one I used to own, that
are placarded "slips with flaps prohibited". So I
see this as a very necessary skill for pilots.

Taking into consideration the above, that's how I
came to my personal minimum of 10 gallons remaining
for the RV-10. In fact, I think my lowest was 10.2,
and that only happened one time. If I were even
to want to stretch my fuel burn lower, the only way
I would do it is to fly one tank empty, and land
with 5 gallons in the remaining tank....but take this
with a grain of salt because that would violate
the FAR's...the RV-10 in cruise (low-altitude
such as going to an alternate airport) will generally
burn more than 10gph (usually 14 or so), and
that puts you below the 30 minute fuel reserve
minimums. I myself would only use that method
in the most extreme fuel emergency, but it is
a tool to keep in your back pocket.

Hopefully by reading the above, if you weren't already
thinking of fuel minimums for yourself, you can at
least have some food for thought when you develop
your own personal fuel minimums.

Tim

On 03/28/2017 07:24 AM, Linn Walters wrote:
Quote:
That might be good info but useless. If you depart or land with that
little fuel then you're obviously suicidal and in need of professional help.
IMHO of course!!!!
Linn
Sent from Samsung tablet cruising on the Oasis Of The Seas.
-------- Original message --------
From Jim Beyer <fehdxlbb(at)gmail.com>
Date: 03/28/2017 1:41 AM (GMT-05:00)
To rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject Re: Unuseable Full


How much is unusable in a takeoff/go-around attitude? Or a cross-wind
slip to landing? That's the value we all should really be seeking and
using to flight plan.

Fly safe,
Jim

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 28, 2017, at 00:23, Albert <ibspud(at)roadrunner.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I have 8 oz in one tank and 9 in the other of unusable full when tanks
were
> drained while sitting on the ramp. Aircraft was in level cruise flight and
> tank was used in flight until fuel pressure started to drop. Switched
tanks,
> landed and drained tank. Very small amount of unusable fuel but makes me
> aware of the need to frequently check tanks for water/other contamination.
> Anyone else have numbers?
> Albert Gardner
> RV-10 N991RV
> Yuma, AZ


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Kellym



Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:21 am    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

Just a couple points. Most single engine Cessnas have some
recommendation against slipping with full flaps. However, I don't recall
any that prohibited it, and certainly not slips for crosswind landing.
Second, the FAR fuel requirements for VFR and IFR are "planning"
requirements, not a requirement to land with that much fuel. For VFR it
is only a "planned" 30 minutes, which I guess would be about 7-8 gal.
For IFR if no alternate is required, 45 min. If alternate is needed,
then fuel to that alternate plus 45 min.

That said, I too am very uncomfortable with less than 5 gal per tank, or
10 gal all in one tank, and I prefer to plan for 15 gal on board at
landing. Likewise, if it looks like I am burning more than planned by
1/2 way distance, I will start evaluating alternates to at least get 15
gal extra.
As a controller, I once worked a DC-8-63 that landed without enough fuel
to even make a go around to a less suitable airport 7 miles away. They
had an enroute alternate, passed that when destination was still above
minimums, and then destination and nearby alternates went below
minimums. Forced them to fly an extra 300 nm to nearest suitable
airport, which fortunately for them was clear and 80 nm vis.
I can't imagine the pressure of being committed to a single shot at
landing a large jet from 300 nm out, knowing that any delay, any miscalc
and you would crash.

On 3/28/2017 6:19 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
Quote:


Quote:
My big worry, and the reason I really don't fly it down
to less than 5 gallons per tank, has a few reasons:

1) with float error and such, I don't want to count on the
accuracy that low.

It will be really the only way to help
Quote:
guard against fuel un-porting in lower fuel situations,
and there are planes like one I used to own, that
are placarded "slips with flaps prohibited". So I
see this as a very necessary skill for pilots.

Taking into consideration the above, that's how I
came to my personal minimum of 10 gallons remaining
for the RV-10. In fact, I think my lowest was 10.2,
and that only happened one time. If I were even
to want to stretch my fuel burn lower, the only way
I would do it is to fly one tank empty, and land
with 5 gallons in the remaining tank....but take this
with a grain of salt because that would violate
the FAR's...the RV-10 in cruise (low-altitude
such as going to an alternate airport) will generally
burn more than 10gph (usually 14 or so), and
that puts you below the 30 minute fuel reserve
minimums. I myself would only use that method
in the most extreme fuel emergency, but it is
a tool to keep in your back pocket.

Hopefully by reading the above, if you weren't already
thinking of fuel minimums for yourself, you can at
least have some food for thought when you develop
your own personal fuel minimums.

Tim


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tim Olson



Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2871

PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:35 am    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

Yeah, my Sundowner was one of them that was "Slips with flaps
prohibited". I was told a week or so ago that the
flight training cessna locally (M model) was no slips with
full flaps, but as you said, that may be that it was
just advice, not a real prohibition. Still, my main point
was that I think a pilot should absolutely learn both
methods and then try to perfect the no-slip landing so
that they can avoid fuel issues easiest. The same thing
with fuel minimums...may as well not go with the letter of the
law minimums when a prudent amount will be more. For my
students who solo, I will tell them they must land with
10 gallons or 1 hour as an absolute minimum for solo
requirements.

The worst I ever personally saw was an airplane that
landed on a direct flight from the east coast, who
landed straight in, and as they were taxiing to the ramp,
the prop quit about 100 yards away and they rolled to the
pump....bone dry. That was way too closet.

Tim
On 3/28/2017 10:20 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
Quote:


Just a couple points. Most single engine Cessnas have some
recommendation against slipping with full flaps. However, I don't recall
any that prohibited it, and certainly not slips for crosswind landing.
Second, the FAR fuel requirements for VFR and IFR are "planning"
requirements, not a requirement to land with that much fuel. For VFR it
is only a "planned" 30 minutes, which I guess would be about 7-8 gal.
For IFR if no alternate is required, 45 min. If alternate is needed,
then fuel to that alternate plus 45 min.

That said, I too am very uncomfortable with less than 5 gal per tank, or
10 gal all in one tank, and I prefer to plan for 15 gal on board at
landing. Likewise, if it looks like I am burning more than planned by
1/2 way distance, I will start evaluating alternates to at least get 15
gal extra.
As a controller, I once worked a DC-8-63 that landed without enough fuel
to even make a go around to a less suitable airport 7 miles away. They
had an enroute alternate, passed that when destination was still above
minimums, and then destination and nearby alternates went below
minimums. Forced them to fly an extra 300 nm to nearest suitable
airport, which fortunately for them was clear and 80 nm vis.
I can't imagine the pressure of being committed to a single shot at
landing a large jet from 300 nm out, knowing that any delay, any miscalc
and you would crash.



- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
rv10pro(at)gmail.com
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:35 am    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

In January 1981,Portland had a DC-8 which circled multiple times during a mechanical issue until both turbines went silent.  11 soles were lost when the pilot made a choice to continue flight.  The landing was on 162nd and Stark in SE PDX.
The FAA developed Cockpit Resource Management as a result.  Discussions were held of the independent streak of post war fighter pilots in the decision making process..  CRM morphed into Crew Resourse Management which places the responsibility of the newer pilots to reach out and consult every available resource.  As a result the safety record continues to improve.
John
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 8:20 AM, Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com (kellym(at)aviating.com)> wrote:
Quote:
--> RV10-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen <kellym(at)aviating.com (kellym(at)aviating.com)>

Just a couple points. Most single engine Cessnas have some recommendation against slipping with full flaps. However, I don't recall any that prohibited it, and certainly not slips for crosswind landing.
Second, the FAR fuel requirements for VFR and IFR are "planning" requirements, not a requirement to land with that much fuel. For VFR it is only a "planned" 30 minutes, which I guess would be about 7-8 gal.
For IFR if no alternate is required, 45 min. If alternate is needed, then fuel to that alternate plus 45 min.

That said, I too am very uncomfortable with less than 5 gal per tank, or 10 gal all in one tank, and I prefer to plan for 15 gal on board at landing. Likewise, if it looks like I am burning more than planned by 1/2 way distance, I will start evaluating alternates to at least get 15 gal extra.
As a controller, I once worked a DC-8-63 that landed without enough fuel to even make a go around to a less suitable airport 7 miles away. They had an enroute alternate, passed that when destination was still above minimums, and then destination and nearby alternates went below minimums. Forced them to fly an extra 300 nm to nearest suitable airport, which fortunately for them was clear and 80 nm vis.
I can't imagine the pressure of being committed to a single shot at landing a large jet from 300 nm out, knowing that any delay, any miscalc and you would crash.

On 3/28/2017 6:19 AM, Tim Olson wrote:
Quote:
--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>

Quote:
My big worry, and the reason I really don't fly it down
to less than 5 gallons per tank, has a few reasons:

1) with float error and such, I don't want to count on the
accuracy that low.

  It will be really the only way to help
Quote:
guard against fuel un-porting in lower fuel situations,
and there are planes like one I used to own, that
are placarded "slips with flaps prohibited".  So I
see this as a very necessary skill for pilots.

Taking into consideration the above, that's how I
came to my personal minimum of 10 gallons remaining
for the RV-10.  In fact, I think my lowest was 10.2,
and that only happened one time.   If I were even
to want to stretch my fuel burn lower, the only way
I would do it is to fly one tank empty, and land
with 5 gallons in the remaining tank....but take this
with a grain of salt because that would violate
the FAR's...the RV-10 in cruise (low-altitude
such as going to an alternate airport) will generally
burn more than 10gph (usually 14 or so), and
that puts you below the 30 minute fuel reserve
minimums.  I myself would only use that method
in the most extreme fuel emergency, but it is
a tool to keep in your back pocket.

Hopefully by reading the above, if you weren't already
thinking of fuel minimums for yourself, you can at
least have some food for thought when you develop
your own personal fuel minimums.

Tim

====================================
-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
====================================
FORUMS -
eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
====================================
WIKI -
errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com
====================================
b Site -
          -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
====================================







- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
rene(at)felker.com
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:56 am    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

Not to start another discussion....but why not. I thought the no slip with full flips on some aircraft, t-tail in particular, had to do with blanking out the tail. I know is some Cessna in my past, it had a time limit and I assume that was a fuel issue.

Rene'
801-721-6080

--


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
Tim Olson



Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2871

PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:13 am    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

Sadly I personally haven't heard the "why" but just see the placards
or notes in the POH. I guess they aren't expected to tell us
the details but only give us the prohibition... I can only
assume that in some cases it's aerodynamic and other cases it's
fuel or systems related. There are probably far better
sources than myself who could speak to the why on various
airplanes.

Tim
On 03/28/2017 10:55 AM, Rene wrote:
[quote]

Not to start another discussion....but why not. I thought the no slip with full flips on some aircraft, t-tail in particular, had to do with blanking out the tail. I know is some Cessna in my past, it had a time limit and I assume that was a fuel issue.

Rene'
801-721-6080

--


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
flyboy(at)gmail.com
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:25 am    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

The older 172s (40 degrees of flaps), will sometimes, after prolonged slips with full flaps, unexpectedly and sharply drop the nose because of blocked airflow over the tail.  It's easy to recover, but it's scary.  The newer, 30 degree flapped 172s will not do this (I beleive this s why flaps were limited to 30 degrees), but will do some pretty odd buffeting in prolonged slips with full flaps.  Fuel supply is not a problem as long as you've got some fuel in both tanks and the selector on both.

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com (Tim(at)myrv10.com)> wrote:
[quote]--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>

Sadly I personally haven't heard the "why" but just see the placards
or notes in the POH.  I guess they aren't expected to tell us
the details but only give us the prohibition...   I can only
assume that in some cases it's aerodynamic and other cases it's
fuel or systems related.  There are probably far better
sources than myself who could speak to the why on various
airplanes.

Tim


On 03/28/2017 10:55 AM, Rene wrote:
[quote] --> RV10-List message posted by: "Rene" <rene(at)felker.com (rene(at)felker.com)>

Not to start another discussion....but why not. I thought the no slip with full flips on some aircraft, t-tail in particular, had to do with blanking out the tail.  I know is some Cessna in my past, it had a time limit and I assume that was a fuel issue.

Rene'
[url=tel:801-721-6080]801-721-6080[/url]

--


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
Kellym



Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 1700
Location: Sun Lakes AZ

PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 8:54 am    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

Fuel supply is a problem with the older Cessnas. I don't recall when or
if they got rid of the placard which required 1/4 tank for takeoff or go
around. the pickup was somewhere near the middle of the tank, (fore and
aft axis) and would unport with nose up attitude used on takeoff climb.

On 3/28/2017 9:24 AM, Berck E. Nash wrote:
[quote] The older 172s (40 degrees of flaps), will sometimes, after prolonged
slips with full flaps, unexpectedly and sharply drop the nose because of
blocked airflow over the tail. It's easy to recover, but it's scary.
The newer, 30 degree flapped 172s will not do this (I beleive this s why
flaps were limited to 30 degrees), but will do some pretty odd buffeting
in prolonged slips with full flaps. Fuel supply is not a problem as
long as you've got some fuel in both tanks and the selector on both.

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com
<mailto:Tim(at)myrv10.com>> wrote:



Sadly I personally haven't heard the "why" but just see the placards
or notes in the POH. I guess they aren't expected to tell us
the details but only give us the prohibition... I can only
assume that in some cases it's aerodynamic and other cases it's
fuel or systems related. There are probably far better
sources than myself who could speak to the why on various
airplanes.

Tim

On 03/28/2017 10:55 AM, Rene wrote:


<mailto:rene(at)felker.com>>

Not to start another discussion....but why not. I thought the no
slip with full flips on some aircraft, t-tail in particular, had
to do with blanking out the tail. I know is some Cessna in my
past, it had a time limit and I assume that was a fuel issue.

Rene'
801-721-6080 <tel:801-721-6080>

--


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor # 5286
KCHD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flying-nut(at)cfl.rr.com
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 12:10 pm    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

The flap change was done for certification .... has something to do with ability to climb with full flaps during a go around. 
Linn


Sent from Samsung tablet cruising on the Oasis Of The Seas.
-------- Original message --------
From "Berck E. Nash" <flyboy(at)gmail.com>
Date: 03/28/2017 12:24 PM (GMT-05:00)
To rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject Re: RV10-List: Unuseable Full


The older 172s (40 degrees of flaps), will sometimes, after prolonged slips with full flaps, unexpectedly and sharply drop the nose because of blocked airflow over the tail.  It's easy to recover, but it's scary.  The newer, 30 degree flapped 172s will not do this (I beleive this s why flaps were limited to 30 degrees), but will do some pretty odd buffeting in prolonged slips with full flaps.  Fuel supply is not a problem as long as you've got some fuel in both tanks and the selector on both.

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Tim Olson <Tim(at)myrv10.com (Tim(at)myrv10.com)> wrote:
[quote]--> RV10-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>

Sadly I personally haven't heard the "why" but just see the placards
or notes in the POH.  I guess they aren't expected to tell us
the details but only give us the prohibition...   I can only
assume that in some cases it's aerodynamic and other cases it's
fuel or systems related.  There are probably far better
sources than myself who could speak to the why on various
airplanes.

Tim


On 03/28/2017 10:55 AM, Rene wrote:
[quote] --> RV10-List message posted by: "Rene" <rene(at)felker.com (rene(at)felker.com)>

Not to start another discussion....but why not. I thought the no slip with full flips on some aircraft, t-tail in particular, had to do with blanking out the tail.  I know is some Cessna in my past, it had a time limit and I assume that was a fuel issue.

Rene'
[url=tel:801-721-6080]801-721-6080[/url]

--


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
Bob Turner



Joined: 03 Jan 2009
Posts: 881
Location: Castro Valley, CA

PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 1:38 pm    Post subject: Re: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

flying-nut(at)cfl.rr.com wrote:
The flap change was done for certification .... has something to do with ability to climb with full flaps during a go around.�
Linn
--


yes, it was done in conjunction with an increase in gross weight. There's an STC available for older 172s.


- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

_________________
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
maca2790



Joined: 26 Jan 2011
Posts: 59
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 4:51 pm    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

Well I ran my Right tank empty accidentally in purpose while in the Circuit at Bathurst, NSW Aus. When I checked how much there was left in the tank I got 120 ml out of it. But I also had the engine die on me when doing a big side slip in level flight for an extended time. The tank was indicating 17 ltrs at the time. It certainly got my attention real quick as I was only 700 ft agl at the time. Anyway from that event I made a note to myself to not go below 20 ltrs (5.2 Galls US) on any tank while in flight.

Cheers John MacCalum
RV10 41016
VH-DUU
Quote:
On 29 Mar 2017, at 8:38 am, Bob Turner <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> wrote:




flying-nut(at)cfl.rr.com wrote:
> The flap change was done for certification .... has something to do with ability to climb with full flaps during a go around.�
> Linn
>
>
> --


yes, it was done in conjunction with an increase in gross weight. There's an STC available for older 172s.

--------
Bob Turner
RV-10 QB




Read this topic online here:

http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467767#467767











- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cooprv7(at)yahoo.com
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 5:19 pm    Post subject: Unuseable Full Reply with quote

I too strive to always land with at least 10 gallons, roughly an hour of cruise burn. However, if I'm going to be even close I burn most of the left tank out, not enough to go quiet, so the majority is in the right tank to minimize any chance of the fuel pickup becoming uncovered with fuel during approach and landing. Just a technique.

Marcus

Quote:
On Mar 28, 2017, at 8:49 PM, John MacCallum <john.maccallum(at)bigpond.com> wrote:



Well I ran my Right tank empty accidentally in purpose while in the Circuit at Bathurst, NSW Aus. When I checked how much there was left in the tank I got 120 ml out of it. But I also had the engine die on me when doing a big side slip in level flight for an extended time. The tank was indicating 17 ltrs at the time. It certainly got my attention real quick as I was only 700 ft agl at the time. Anyway from that event I made a note to myself to not go below 20 ltrs (5.2 Galls US) on any tank while in flight.

Cheers John MacCalum
RV10 41016
VH-DUU


> On 29 Mar 2017, at 8:38 am, Bob Turner <bobturner(at)alum.rpi.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> flying-nut(at)cfl.rr.com wrote:
>> The flap change was done for certification .... has something to do with ability to climb with full flaps during a go around.�
>> Linn
>>
>>
>> --
>
>
> yes, it was done in conjunction with an increase in gross weight. There's an STC available for older 172s.
>
> --------
> Bob Turner
> RV-10 QB
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=467767#467767
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>







- The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum -
 

Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:

http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group