VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #1  
Old 10-28-2017, 02:10 PM
xblueh2o xblueh2o is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: SF East Bay
Posts: 712
Default Give me some static

Ports that is.
After being away from the project for a couple months due to work I am finally starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel (might be a train headed for me). When I left the project I was closing in on installing the turtle deck and had a list of a half dozen or so items I wanted to accomplish in the aft fuselage before installing the skin for the final time. One of the items on the list was installing the static ports. Looking for feedback on all the various options. What did you install, did it work as advertised without issues, did it connect easily with the static lines, was the connection easily leak free or did you have to work at it etc etc etc. Let's hear your experience.
__________________
Sam
RV-8 with the Showplanes Fastback conversion
Emp completed except for glass work
Wings completed except for bottom skin and glass work
Fuselage underway
N18451 reserved

Last edited by xblueh2o : 10-28-2017 at 02:13 PM. Reason: Mongo no type good.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-28-2017, 03:51 PM
BobTurner BobTurner is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 4,687
Default

My completely unscientific opinion from reading the posts is that, when it comes to the accuracy of the static port pressure, there are relatively few complaints if you "follow the plans", and relatively more complaints if you deviate. Beauty, otoh, is clearly in the eye of the beholder.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-28-2017, 04:31 PM
Mel's Avatar
Mel Mel is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas area
Posts: 9,644
Default

Installed per plans in 1993. Still works perfectly today.
__________________
Mel Asberry..DAR since last century
A&P/EAA Tech Counselor/Flight Advisor
Specializing in Amateur-Built and Light-Sport Aircraft
<n168tx(at)flytx.net>
North Texas (8TA5)
RV-6 Flying since 1993
175hp O-320
3-Blade Catto (since 2003)
FRIEND of the RV-1
Eagle's Nest Mentor
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-30-2017, 01:28 AM
xblueh2o xblueh2o is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: SF East Bay
Posts: 712
Default

The stock system is absolutely an option but was wondering of the other options what people's experience was.
__________________
Sam
RV-8 with the Showplanes Fastback conversion
Emp completed except for glass work
Wings completed except for bottom skin and glass work
Fuselage underway
N18451 reserved
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-30-2017, 10:45 AM
Ironflight's Avatar
Ironflight Ironflight is offline
VAF Moderator / Line Boy
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dayton, NV
Posts: 11,420
Default

Per plans static systems on all three of our RV's - zero issues, zero problems, and as accurate as can be measured. Cost is a few cents for the rivets, and a little more for teh aquarium tubing.

I have read literally hundreds of threads here on VAF of folks that wanted to use more sophisticated, prettier, and more expensive systems - most of which then had all sorts of issues with inaccuracy.

The only thing you want out of a static system is for it to work, and be low maintenance - after that, its just throwing money and time away. Airframe designers spend a surprising amount of test flight time finding accurate static port designs and locations - why duplicate the effort when its already been done?

There are FAR more interesting ways of throwing money at airplanes....
__________________
Paul F. Dye
Editor in Chief - KITPLANES Magazine
RV-8 - N188PD - "Valkyrie"
RV-6 (By Marriage) - N164MS - "Mikey"
RV-3B - N13PL - "Tsamsiyu"
A&P, EAA Tech Counselor/Flight Advisor
Dayton Valley Airpark (A34)
http://Ironflight.com
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-30-2017, 12:46 PM
jjconstant's Avatar
jjconstant jjconstant is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Oakland CA
Posts: 738
Default

As someone who spent way too much time messing with static port shape and location (first version was part of a heated pitot tube with a static vent on it as well, that caused auto pilot oscillations) I would say the only concern I had with the factory unit was how well it attached to the tubing on the inside of the fuselage. When I reverted to the factory recommendation I remember a fair amount of goo being needed for sealing.

"There are FAR more interesting ways of throwing money at airplanes"...LOVE IT Paul
__________________
All Best

Jeremy Constant
RV7A "Stella Luna" ECI IO-360 WW200RV Pmags 360hrs
VAF 2017 paid plus some for those who can't
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-31-2017, 08:33 AM
Robert Anglin Robert Anglin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: houston, texas
Posts: 711
Default Some change.

We had put the factory ports and tubing in to start with, but did not like the way the pop-rivets made-up to the tubing. Once we had chosen a Garmin pitot with AOA in it we went back and changed the ports to a "P-51" from the Wicks Co., then got the Air Safety-1 tubing kit so we would have the quick disconnects added to the system for better servicing later on. Ports are in the same place and no real problems with the system other than the pilot likes to push it around with hi VSI. We will have to straiten him out one of these days.
Hope this helps. Your, R.E.A. III # 80888
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:34 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.