What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Service Bulletin (RV-10 Install Door Safety Latch)

DeltaRomeo

DeltaRomeo

doug reeves: unfluencer
Staff member
Just posted on the mothership.

SB 10-1-4: http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/sb10-1-4.pdf

br,
dr


Screencaptures of the SB....

2gxpkdw.jpg



16hvx1t.jpg

​
 
Last edited:
It is my understanding that it improves on this design.

http://img177.imageshack.us/i/imgp39462nm1.jpg/

http://img217.imageshack.us/i/imgp39442xo6.jpg/

Long over due, just glad we only lost some horizontal stabs and not some pilots and passengers. Thanks to Van for addressing the issue!

It's been flying on a some -10's in beta form for a little while. It can be opened from the outside. I've heard rumors that it takes 8-10 hours to fabricate and install parts on both doors. The retro fitting process was pretty straight forward on some finished and painted doors.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ditto, I'd like to see some pictures of the real thing too...I guess soon people will start to do it as soon as they get parts, then please post.

Regards,
Rudi
 
Have there been any failures lately or should I say lost doors lately? Has anyone tried flying with these safety latch only engaged? Just wondering if the new safety latch will hold by itself.
 
Yep - long overdue!
RH door lost about a month ago here in Dark Africa as well. Door landed on a nice piece of lawn in front of a house on a farm (ranch for you guys) and was recovered with minimal damage and put back.

Am I right to say that ALL door departures was on the RH sides? It seems like that anyway. That in itself tells a story. I am now closing the RH door from the OUTSIDE before getting in myself.
 
The last one in the US that I know of occurred in Missouri about 2 months ago.
 
Long, long over due. The RV-10 community has known about this for years. I talked to -10 driver that have lost the door and have it hit and stay on the horizontal stabilizer. The man and his passenger was very lucky to have landed and survived.

I have a sign on the right door that says only the PIC can close and lock this door, and I close if from the outside. I never trust the lights, too hard to see IMHO. I physically reach back and touch the locking pin that goes through the frame, and push on both doors to make sure the pins are properly engaged.

I certainly will be installing the latches also.

It is interesting to me that the Service Bulletin says to "Complete Prior To Next Flight", but I don't believe the kits are available yet. I'm not trying to be critical, just pointing this out. The entire RV-10 fleet is grounded if you abide by the SB.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
I have a sign on the right door that says only the PIC can close and lock this door, and I close if from the outside. I never trust the lights, too hard to see IMHO. I phyically reach back and touch the locking pin that goes through the frame, and push on both doors to make sure the pins are properly engaged.
Click to expand...

I do the same and will continue closing the doors for the passengers on the outside and checking the pin before start up and again before takeoff even with the SB. This door coming off sounds real scary so one should never take it lightly. To me it is the most important thing than any other preflight check. If it happened, I am sure it would be the last time the passenger would want to fly with me;)
 
On another note...anybody know if Van is working on a door redesign? THis has probably been talked about before.

Ryan
 
Interesting, what is the root cause?

I am going to have to think about this SB before installing.
It would have been nice to talk with the whole community of RV-10 builders before launching this SB. I do not feel it is necessary and is just an extra device that if not installed properly will not function correctly I would suspect. If you drive to root cause on the door issue it comes down to people not installing the warning lights, and not properly completing their pre-flight.

I don't want to offend anyone that has had their door come off but I have heard many stories about the doors that have come off, especially the one that hit the horizontal stabilizer and there were many other factors involved with that incident. Most of them will admit that the door was never fully closed before taking off. All of them should have been prevented through proper preflight and checklists.

If the current system is installed correctly, the indicator lights installed, it is very unlikely and almost impossible to have a problem. The only way for the door to open is if you squeezed the interlock on the handle and opened the door. I know there are many RV-10's flying around with no indicator lights on the doors and I don't understand why. They work so great. On my doors if the pin moves 1/8" away from fully closed the lights come on.

My preflight includes the following:
-Confirm door handle has locked into place
-Check all four corners for any obvious gap
-Check door ajar light
-Before takeoff, check all warning lights (includes the door ajar light)

If the proximity sensors are installed correctly it is IMPOSSIBLE not to have each of the four pins in their proper spot. If one is caught outside the cabin (which has happened to me when passengers try to shut the door before I get there) the light is on and there is an obvious gap.

Another concern I read about is the handle not locking into place. If yours does not, take it apart and fix it. Once mine snaps into place it will not rotate and is very safe.

I may find that this is a great addition after I have played with someones door that has this new addition but I won't be adding this to my experimental plane anytime soon. I worry about emergencies and having someone on the outside who is trying to get me and my family out try to understand that you have to lift the little handle, push the button and rotate the handle.

I agree that the door can be improved but this is a very poor band-aid. I don't want to get flamed here, I just want new builders to understand that the doors are not unsafe and if installed correctly with the warning lights and properly locking handles they are safe. New builders have this perception that the doors need a 100% redesign, and I don't want anyone to be scared off.

:)
 
Last edited:
When you are inside of the plane and want to open the door, how do you open the latch? Do you grab the edge of it. What am I missing here? Oh ya and you are on fire!
 
I'm with Scott on this one

We need to take all flying very seriously and my wife knows how to close her door but I'd rather do it. She gets a little snippy when I check behind her but I remind her who the pilot-in-command is:)

I get antsy when the passenger closes the door, so I reach behind their seat and look and push both corners.

I think the outside tab on the safety latch can be modified so that it's a flush, round button with a "Push to open" label.

Best,
 
I am going to side with you on this Scott. I don't like the latch and the only way my doors are coming off are if they are not shut properly. I want to see somebody fly with this new latch only holding the door. A red strap hooked to the lever might be helpful for getting out.
 
Scott, I agree with what you are saying, but I have found the warning light system does not work well in different light situations. Like Pierre, no matter what the lights say, or the what the passenger says, I "always" double check to make sure by feeling the aft pins and pushing on the door fore & aft, or just shut the door from the outside. It's just a good habit for me now. I have caught the door being adjar twice. :eek:
 
Last edited:
Good Observation

That is an interesting observation. I did not use the lights supplied by Van's. I purchased my light from Lancair and I only have one light. I did my wiring so that the light comes on if any of the four proximity sensors trips it.
My light is very bright and is very obvious in any lighting condition. I wonder if the light needs to be changed in the Van's kit?

Here is a picture I found of my lights. The first light is the master caution which is triggered by the GRT EIS, the second light is the alternator caution triggered by the B&C controller, the third is my Door Ajar and the last two are my left and right low fuel lights triggered by sensors placed at 5 gallons.
102509232_egqog-L.jpg


Geico266 said:
Scott, I agree with what you are saying, but I have found the warning lite system does not work well in different light situations. Like Pierre, no matter what the lites say, or the passenger says, I "always" double check to make sure by feeling the aft pins and pushing on the door fore & aft. It's just a good habit for me now.
Click to expand...
 
Not sure what to think of this. It would really would be nice to know if it holds with out the pins. I am sure no one wants to try that to find out. I do not consider this a fix, just a way of giving a bit more redundancy. Fix might be the wrong word, as the doors are very safe once they are closed as is.
As I think more about the design, if the back pin is not in, I would think that this clip would not be in place either. It might give a better chance for people that are not checking the pins to clearly "See" that it is not shut. (Not that this is right) Some people have the back pin area covered so feeling for the pin is not an option and pushing on the door is a check. The clip being in a better view might help. I would still push on the door though to make sure it is solid.
 
Last edited:
I'm in the same boat as Scott here, and I haven't decided if I am going to do it yet or not. Having just finished painting and starting the flight test program, I am not real anxious to tear up the doors. Especially since I added nice wooden door sills, even the supplied kit will take some modification for me.
So here's what I've noticed on my second RV-10. We all get to improve some things when we redo it, huh? :) I used the aftermarket aluminum door guides and really got a nice tight fit on the doors this time. I have not noticed the bowing out of the doors in flight that I clearly noticed on the last one. I did wire the door warning light circuitry and have 2 nice big red lights directly in front of the pilot. I also wired the power to that circuit to a micro switch on the throttle quadrant, so in the summer when we taxi with the doors open I won't learn to ignore the lights. They should just come on when the throttle is advanced for takeoff power and the doors aren't secured. I get to check them every time on the preflight with power applied.
Since no one flies my airplane except me, I know to pay attention to the doors, and am in a habit of verifying and calling "doors latched" prior to takeoff.
For those of you who happen to be in the same frame of mind, what I would encourage all of us to do is to at least comply with the SB IF and WHEN you should happen to sell your airplane.
Vic
 
Very interesting from the point of view of a non -10 pilot. We are totally anal in our -9 of calling "Canopy - Canopy" (side latch, overhead latch), just before pulling out on the runway for takeoff! Seems much the same. If it isn't called, there should be a big *** kicking just at lift off when you realize it...
 
more lipstick on a pig

During the construction of my plane which was the 10th. kit sold I was not satisfied with the door design or mechanism. Unable to lock the doors was the first issue for me, the inner door handle was the only thing to grab to close the door and it was awkwardly located forward so that as you pulled the door closed it rotated the handle forward making the doorpins protrude outward and hit the outside of the door opening, goodbye paint.
Looking for options I came across the Hendricks flush latches and started working on how to install them. They were very time consuming but now, I feel worth it. I could now lock my door and have the flush external appearance. I added armrests that provided a separate handle to grab onto to close the door. Then came the door pins and guides from Rivethead Aero and later I Fly RV-10.com that significantly improved the performance of the latching and also would keep the paint on the plane if the latch was in the closed position when the door was being closed.

Van's then gave us the indicator lights with the proximity sensors. I looked at them and felt the wiring scheme was the long way around and I didn't like the radio shack components, but the idea of monitoring the pin position was sound thinking. I installed my own LED indicators connected to micro-switches that could be adjusted so that the only way to get two green lights was for the pins to be fully engaged in the door jamb. Similar to the proximity but a mechanical switch instead. One switch was fed the positive on a 2 amp fuse and the other switch the negative. The only way possible to get a green light is for both the front and rear pins to be fully engaged.
However, given all of the time spent upgrading the doors, I as Scott Schmidt and others have mentioned, still manually check the doors to be sure they are closed.
I know that installing the pins and guides from what ever source you choose improves the door operation significantly because I had the delrin door guides and then Rivethead guides and pins.
Finally, It would be nice to know if the aircraft that have had door departures had any of the upgrades already available to them installed and which ones.

As far as installing this latest wonder on my plane... I don't think so. Looks gotta count for something!

Don Orrick
N410JA Flying
40010
 
You trust your life to idiot lites?

I fully agree with Scott and his post. I would add to the reasons the doors may be opening is poor construction and/or amending the door pin measurements to make the pins not protrude out so far and scratch the paint when shut accidently. Look at some of the GAPS in these doors on some finished planes and the way the door seal is attached.

These planes are not aerobatic either. Doors made per the plans and flown per the specs will not accidently come open during flight. I am sure LIABILITY is driving this SB and I am also sure the RV community will engineer a much better fix (if needed) than what is proposed.

My 2 cents to a senseless issue.

DEAN

400 hours and heading for 500!
 
Agree with Scott, however a few months ago we realised how much the door on the RHS sucks out from the fuse, so we went looking for a pin/latching mechanism that prevented the 1/4" gap that appears in flight.

I have seen photo's of other RV-10's with the door clearly sucking out.

So we found a home type door pin latch and fashioned it into the door and sill and rather like the Vans set upin a way.

It works well. Stops the door being sucked out.

Our main reason aside from the flexing of the door was that if you accidently pulled the door lever up far enough (we have a Hendricks system) and that would be a long way up of course, the door pins would disengage. At least with the extra pin/latch the door should not open.

All it takes is a shirt/jacket sleeve or a headset cord to pull the door lever up!

So aside from the obvious pre takeoff checks, it could happen in flight.

Our door pins are monitored and alarmed by the Dynon system and that works well! :)

DB
 
There is no way to accidently pull the Vans door handle up during flight if the thing is pushed fully down. It will lock.
 
TSwezey said:
There is no way to accidently pull the Vans door handle up during flight if the thing is pushed fully down. It will lock.
Click to expand...

As a new owner of an RV-10 can anyone tell me have thiese door problems happened when the doors were properly locked or did they happen if they weren't properly locked. My doors seem to lock well but I'm concerned could they still open?
Alan
N668G
 
RV10inOz said:
Agree with Scott, however a few months ago we realised how much the door on the RHS sucks out from the fuse, so we went looking for a pin/latching mechanism that prevented the 1/4" gap that appears in flight.

I have seen photo's of other RV-10's with the door clearly sucking out.

So we found a home type door pin latch and fashioned it into the door and sill and rather like the Vans set upin a way.

It works well. Stops the door being sucked out.

Our main reason aside from the flexing of the door was that if you accidently pulled the door lever up far enough (we have a Hendricks system) and that would be a long way up of course, the door pins would disengage. At least with the extra pin/latch the door should not open.

All it takes is a shirt/jacket sleeve or a headset cord to pull the door lever up!

So aside from the obvious pre takeoff checks, it could happen in flight.

Our door pins are monitored and alarmed by the Dynon system and that works well! :)

DB
Click to expand...

If the Van's door latch is working properly, the handle cannot be moved from the shut position towards the open position without pushing a release button. So, does the Hendricks system not have a similar locking mechanism when the door is shut? If that is the case, I would consider that an unacceptable system.
 
my 2 cents

I have to agree with Scott, and Don O. here, at least as far as Vans door light system is designed. I used their magnetic switches, but I didnt like the use of continuous power, to turn a light off.:confused:

Instead, I wired the system with green lights, and a "push to test" button. The button switches and lights are all in series to give a green "OK" light only when both pins on a door are engaged. I have two lights, one for each door-----that way I know which door is not latched. The door test will be an item on the check list. And power is only used for the test.

As I didnt build the doors, I cant say a lot about the installation process, and initial setup of the mechanism.

But when the doors started departing the planes in flight, I went over my system VERY carefully, and found the previous owner had one of the pins a bit short of good engagement. This prompted me to made a change in the gear rack for the pins, instead of the pop rivet as a travel stop, I drilled and tapped the end of the rack, so a screw and washer could be inserted in from the end, this allows a little bit more travel for the rod into the door frame, and provides a more positive stop for the gear rack in its plastic guide block.

Another way to achieve a better stop is to use a roll pin as as the stop, instead of the rivet, have it stick out a quarter inch on both sides.

As to the current SB, I think I am going to take a "wait and see" position here, I feel that a properly installed system which is verified each flight is all that is needed.

I agree with a prior post, liability is probably what is driving this. And, yes, at the least, install prior to sale.

One last bit of observation here, with the inner handle located at the front of the door----(needs to be there due to seating position), and the hold open strut at the rear of the door, the forces involved actually set up the rear pin to be problematic.
 
Lets amend the SB.

I suggest that all RV-10 builders and flyers with serial numbers write Van's at [email protected]
I have done the same and have asked Van's to retract the Service Bulletin and offer the latch as an additional and optional latch just as the indicator lights were offered.

I want to summarize what I have heard here.
Issues with the door will arise if:
-Poor door construction causing a bow during flight (Construction error) (Fix: Re-build door or add Van's center latch)
-Pins are not inserted far enough into the aluminum frame (Construction error) (Fix: Re-build pins to extend into aluminum frame)
-Door handle interlock is not engaged (Construction error and/or pilot error) (Fix: Ensure handles are locked before flight, possible rebuild of interlock)
-Door pins were locked outside of cabin (Pilot error)(Fix: Add door check to checklist)

I am fine with Van's offering this as an optional kit but when they say on the service bulletin that it is mandatory, I have a problem.
This is 100% different from the previous SB where we added stiffeners to the vertical stabilizer and empenage.

I want everyone to fly safe and keep our insurance as low as possible, I don't see this as the solution though.
We need to take personal responsibility to build to the highest quality and use our checklists thoroughly.
Any system that is put into place (such as our checklists) is never fixed with more protection devices, systems only work and are improved through training and discipline.

This solution is like adding a fixed gear to the bottom of a retractable landing gear aircraft. It will be there just in case you don't put the gear down.

The warnings lights and center latch should be optional as 100% safe flight can be accomplished with the stock system. I do feel there are may pilots flying safely without even the lights because of their training and checklist discipline. The experimental category will always have construction issues and must accept personal responsibility for that and not burden the whole fleet with the quality shortcomings of the few.

I want everyone to fly safe, have fun and explore this world with their planes and I appreciate Van's offering a system that solves a problem that a few of RV-10's have with the doors bowing as a total replacement of the door is very expensive.

Again, please write Van's and ask for the removal of this SB and make it optional.
 
Last edited:
Door Latch ideas

Here is a couple of ideas for all the engineers out there that want to change the latch. After sitting in Scotts' airplane I came to the conclusion it wasn't needed but I personally think this is way better than the S.B. or B.S?

I know there are tons of versions of this idea it's just to keep everyone thinking of a better solution if it's going to be mandatory.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqOtd-lEQfU
 
Unlike the others, I disagree Scott.

[RANT]

We all want to Bravo and moan because Van's won't acknowledge or fix a known issue. Then when they do come out and do something about it, we want to Bravo and moan some more because it's either 'ugly', 'lousy', or 'too draggy' (that's a dime size piece), or 'someone on the outside needs to know how to open it', or 'there's no hard points', or 'what are we going to do in a fire' (unlatch it), or whatever.

Just using a little common sense can go a long ways in the cockpit, I agree.

But let's also use a little common sense in recognizing our own tendencies as RV-10 drivers.

Let's just look at our own history and see where we screw up time and time again.

1) We've lost at least 3 doors that I know of. I'm sure there are more...
2) We've had dozens of close calls where someone fortunately discovered a door issue before takeoff.

Sum it all up and we've been exposed to door pop-off's dozens and maybe even hundreds of times across the fleet.

How many times has someone needed to be rescued from a fire? None.

How many crashes have resulted in someone needing to be rescued on the ground? None. They never made it that far.

Ladies and gentlemen, we're chasing the wrong tail!! We're all worried about avoiding #1, but we're stepping into #2 because "we do our checks". It's important to continue with those checks, but we've also proven time and time again that humans make mistakes all the time. If you don't think you've made a mistake flying your airplane, then it either doesn't fly or your a statistic waiting for your moment in the sunshine.

As RV-10 drivers our risk is a door falling off; not a ground rescue. I'm not saying that a ground rescue will never happen, but look back on our own history and tell me what the odds say??? The odds say we're more likely to lose many more doors before we even have to worry about a single ground rescue.

It's okay to be critical of the design, that's fine. But all this whining is killing me, especially after Van's did what we asked. They acknowledged and addressed the problem.

If we want something more elegant or something that suites our own personal tastes, then we need build it. It's an experimental airplane.

[/RANT]

Phil
 
Last edited:
Phil said:
Unlike the others, I disagree Scott.

[RANT]

It's okay to be critical of the design, that's fine. But all this whining is killing me, especially after Van's did what we asked. They addressed the problem.

If we want something more elegant or something that suites own personal tastes, then we need build it. It's an experimental airplane.

[/RANT]

Phil
Click to expand...

Who asked??? I don't know of anyone who asked and I wish I could have been involved.

I agree that we can add this device or any other device.
Just look at all the planes that are using different handles and pin blocks. I would say more than 50% of the RV-10's flying have something "not stock" on their doors. My doors are 100% stock and 100% safe and I'm sure all the guys that have modified theirs can say the same.

I'm just asking Van to offer it as an option, not launch this through their Service Bulletin system.
 
Understood, Scott.

I just had to get that off my chest because of all the complaining that's going on. We just seem to have lost sight of the target.

We've all been asking for Vans to address the doors. They know what's going on with the community via Matronics, VAF, and phone calls. They didn't dream this up and then decide to push it out.

We've all been begging for Vans to address the issue. You know that. Just this wasn't the elegant fix we had hoped for.

Phil
 
Phil said:
Understood, Scott.

I just had to get that off my chest because of all the complaining that's going on. We just seem to have lost sight of the target.

We've all been asking for Vans to address the doors. They know what's going on with the community via Matronics, VAF, and phone calls. They didn't dream this up and then decide to push it out.

We've all been begging for Vans to address the issue. You know that. Just this wasn't the elegant fix we had hoped for.

Phil
Click to expand...

I also understand. I should have spoken up during the ranting on Matronics when they discussed "bowing" doors but I didn't. I have been very busy at work the past 6 months and it is hard to keep up with all the discussions.

I just want to drive to root cause and make sure we don't jump to a solution that does not address the REAL problem.

What Sean has posted has the potential of being a great idea and great solution.
 
I agree. I really like Sean's post....

It's by far the best suggestion I've seen so far.

Phil
 
Strasnuts said:
Here is a couple of ideas for all the engineers out there that want to change the latch. After sitting in Scotts' airplane I came to the conclusion it wasn't needed but I personally think this is way better than the S.B. or B.S?

I know there are tons of versions of this idea it's just to keep everyone thinking of a better solution if it's going to be mandatory.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqOtd-lEQfU
Click to expand...

We just had that same discussion about doing it the same way earlier today at our airport meeting.
 
The HEndricks system does not have a release button however it is a large over centre movemt, so to be fair its not an easy thing to accidently open......not at all, but all the other things people have done or fear could happen are possible as humans are involved! :eek:

Again I agree with Scott, it should not be a SB like the doubler plate, one is a structural modification, this one is a risk mitigation device and should be optional or suggesting this or a suitable alternative be fitted, as a prudent mitigator of risk.

By the way Scott.......I bet your RHS door sucks outwards too! ;)
 
RV10inOz said:
By the way Scott.......I bet your RHS door sucks outwards too! ;)
Click to expand...

As soon as the inversion clears here that is one thing I want to check. I thought I had checked that in the past but I really can't remember.

I read that most people are seeing about 1/4", is that correct?
 
A couple of points to consider...

If you look at recent NTSB reports of RV-10 accidents, it is obvious they make a point of evaluating whether a problem with a door might be a mitigating factor in an accident.

AN RV-10 owner or builder is not bound by any regulation to install a modification issued by Van's Aircraft as a Service Bulletin, any more than they are bound to install the indicator light system (which many have not) or built any of the rest of the airplane exactly per the construction manual (which many have not).

The modification was developed because people have failed to properly latch doors before take off (at least one RV-10 pilot has done it twice on the same airplane). This has happened on pilot side doors as well as the passenger side. Doors have also been lost because of incorrect construction. The installation and use of the safety latch expects the doors to have been properly built and installed in the first place.

The safety latch was designed to be as close to 100 % passive as possible. To require no input of a person to have the safety action active other than having pulled the door down to the point that they seem for whatever reason to think the door is latched. To save the situation when someone is just not being a good pilot and paying proper attention (the person that has lost a door twice for example).

If you think you are a pilot that would never take off without a door properly latched (this also implies properly installed and adjusted during construction), then don't install it. You would be the one responsible for providing an explanation of why you didn't install it, if you ever do happen to loose a door.

If you think the safety latch is a poor design, design something else and install that. You have the full latitude to do so for the same reasons you have the latitude to install nothing at all. Keep in mind that you are not even paying anything for the latch kit. It is provided free of charge.
What you do with it us entirely (and legally) up to you.
 
Doors

Well said,

I am in the process of building my doors and I am curious about doors lost because of improper construction. Can someone provide examples.

Pat Stewart
 
center door pin

Visit Greg Hales RV-10 site, he has developed the center pin idea to perfection.
This is where the development of a latch system should be directed. Listed under center door pin on his home page. I think this would be doable no matter what door latches you have. Van's should look at this system.


Don Orrick
N410JA 300 hrs. +
 
Hinges?

While most of the focus is on the latch... perhaps the real problem is the hinge?

Front-hinged doors are inherently safer. They don't have the nasty habit of departing the airframe and hitting the tail when ajar. If you've flown older Cessnas, you've probably experienced the door opening on account of worn latches. It's no big deal. The door will float open a few inches and remain their until you slam it shut again.

The safety latch looks like the easiest fix but I wonder what it would take to convert to a front-hinged design?

cirrus-perspective.jpg
 
Write Van's Aircraft

ScottSchmidt said:
I suggest that all RV-10 builders and flyers with serial numbers write Van's at [email protected]
I have done the same and have asked Van's to retract the Service Bulletin and offer the latch as an additional and optional latch just as the indicator lights were offered.
Click to expand...

I sent Van's Aircraft the following e-mail:

Dear Van's:

I would respectfully request that you reconsider the RV-10 Door SB to make it a recommended change as opposed to "before next flight" and a mandatory change.

If Section 45A was originally included in the first kits and plans each builder could elect to incorporate the modification of the doors into his build or not as he saw fit. Imposing on all prior builders the requirement that such modification be a mandatory modification and for all flying RV-10's like mine to make it a factory SB "before next flight" is grossly unfair.

Please give this careful consideration.

Very truly yours,

Russ Daves
RV-10 #40044
RV6-A #20302
RV-7 #71990
RV-8 # -81492

I hope it will do some good.
 
We are all saying the same thing!

I believe we are all saying the same thing here which is great.

Let's now just memorialize it as "Optional" from our favorite factory in the world.

The RV community takes SB's that say "before further flight" very seriously as do I, this one just doesn't belong in the same category. It is apparent that the majority of RV-10 planes will not be adding this SB to their aircraft (our own prerogative) which says something about the quality and/or safety and/or design of this SB.

I would be shocked if anyone flew or sold a plane without the previous SB's installed.
I just realized or forgot that Van's has a "Letters and Notices" section. This is where this belongs which is the same location as the door indicator lights.
http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/notices.htm
 
Last edited:
ScottSchmidt said:
I believe we are all saying the same thing here which is great.

Let's now just memorialize it as "Optional" from our favorite factory in the world.
Click to expand...

Not to belabor the point, but I don't understand this point...

If everyone agrees that there is nothing regulatory to require you to install the modification just because it is designated as a Service bulletin / install before next flight, then what difference does it make what it is called?

If it was originally part of section 45 and a builder chose to not install it during construction, how is that any different than a builder choosing not to install it now?
 
Dear Scott M

rvbuilder2002 said:
Not to belabor the point, but I don't understand this point...
Click to expand...

The use of the word "Required", and the phrase "Before further flight".

Think how a lawyer would use these if someone sold a plane, without the mod installed, and the buyer sued the seller.

It would seem that the term "Required" might be better as something less imperative. Suggested, recomended, advised ETC all come to mind.

Hope this helps you to understand our position.
 
It is about the preceived authority of an SB.

rvbuilder2002 said:
Not to belabor the point, but I don't understand this point...
Click to expand...

Scott, if Van's puts out SB's that the majority of pilots ignore time after time, then why does Van's even do it? (now I'm really exaggerating the point)

Why would Van's not just change it to a "Letters and Notices" if it doesn't matter and it is optional to all of us?

IMHO it is about keeping SB's respectable. The only two other SB's for RV-10's are the empenage and vertical stab reinforcement that were added because of cracks being discovered.

Anyway, I don't want to argue back and forth here. We have talked before Scott and I really like your comments and feedback on everything here at VAF. We really need to meet up someday like we have talked so I can buy you a beer.

I feel I have stated my position on this and many other RV-10er's feel the same way.
A win-win would be that some can install a third lock that Van's supplies and it is released as a "Letters and Notices" rather than an SB and there won't be a large fleet of RV-10's flying around with 2/3 of the SB's issued from Van's.

I can't thank Van's enough for the great plane they have built. I now have over 670 hours of safe flight and it has changed me my wife's life forever.:)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top