What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Vans acts on nosegear woes

Yeah! Let's kill all of the Lawyers

Quoting a previous post, "yet another ridiculous action brought on by someone's attorney." I guess it does not matter that there has been no reported litigation concerning this matter. I guess it is not possible that Van simply decided that the facts pointed to the new design being safer. I guess it was only a matter of time before someone blamed attorneys. I hear that attorneys are also responsible for global warming.
 
Excellent Information

I think the point is that Van has issued parts and changed the design to provide additional safety margin sometime back. He is now faced with independant testing, possibly more detailed than he is able to perform and this confirms there is value to the added safety margin.

By issuing a mandatory SB, he is helping to ensure that his product is as safe as possible and does not end up getting bad press/reputation. He is also ensuring that any further accidents where the older gear legs were a factor are not his fault. If you decide to keep the old leg then you assume responsibility for that decision.

I know the SB's are not compulsary for Experimental, but I sure would not want to have that argument with an insurance company!

As an A-model builder I welcome the additional information, as we now have some good quality information on exactly what has happened to cause these accidents. By calculating loading on the fork, leaving nose fairings installed and keeping tires well inflated we are in good shape to avoid further problems.

Interestingly, the FAA study found grabbing of the fairing by the tire was not overly significant in contrast to Van's earlier position. I suspect that low tire pressure was more significant in these cases then the fairing grab.

Richard
RV7A Finishing
 
rvbuilder2002 said:
That's great Vern.
The problem is that not every RV is the same.
I am familiar with at least one RV-9A with an Egg. suburu installation that had a nose wheel weight of just about exactly 100 pounds more than the typical O-320/hartzell constant speed prop RV-9A has.
Click to expand...

Yup, and referring to the Service Letter, anything other than the recommend Lycoming engine will result in a higer probability of nose gear incidents.

I think that it will be tough to exceed 325 lbs on the 'stock' RV-9A nose gear if loaded within the CG envelope. To check, just plug the data to the spreadsheet corresponding to your own airplane.

Hopefully, I will get an explanation from Van's on why the chart does not match the calculation for a typical RV-9A (but does for the 7A). I wish Van's had just published a nose wheel weight limitation and let us do the calculation for our own aircraft based on the data we already have from our initial w&b calculations.
 
Last edited:
Steve Ashby said:
Quoting a previous post, "yet another ridiculous action brought on by someone's attorney." I guess it does not matter that there has been no reported litigation concerning this matter. I guess it is not possible that Van simply decided that the facts pointed to the new design being safer. I guess it was only a matter of time before someone blamed attorneys. I hear that attorneys are also responsible for global warming.
Click to expand...

LMAO!! Amen!!
 
Steve Ashby said:
...I hear that attorneys are also responsible for global warming.
Click to expand...

Yes, yes they are responsible for global warming; and if 95% of them would just stop breathing the global temperature would drop by two degrees...its a documented fact, and a consensus of junk scientists and Al Gore agree.

The resulting number of lawyers left would be more than enough to satisfy the world need for litigators. Of course, we would then have to have a special election to replace 3/4's of congress... :D:D:D:D:D [/sarcasm]
 
Gear leg cost

Per e-mail from Ken Scott, the cost of the U-603-3X is $195.00
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Gear lag die

Here in the Michigan area, Production Tool Supply www.pts-tools.com. We can order(or stop by) for the die, ER6111616E (1.250" 16tpi) 2.5"OD for about $40.50. A die holder EV50250 for about $15.75. Please check these numbers yourself to make sure I did not do a typo.

Frank Thorman
Lapeer, MI
N821BF

P.S. Gear lag die should be gear LEG die.
 
Last edited:
Don't waste your money on a threading die.

I tried to rethread a gear leg and made a 6 foot long die holder. Two guys and lots of cutting oil and it was not possible. We only got an extra two to three threads, not the required inch.
Langair used a thread mill on a CNC machine to do it.

Bruce Reynolds
 
I sure would like to see "return parts for exchange" in the instructions for this mandatory service bulletin. If the design is deficient, seems like Van's ought to be making good on it.

I can imagine the response if Ford demanded that you to replace the tie rod on your year-old car, on your nickel.
 
Bruce Reynolds said:
I tried to rethread a gear leg and made a 6 foot long die holder. Two guys and lots of cutting oil and it was not possible. We only got an extra two to three threads, not the required inch.
Langair used a thread mill on a CNC machine to do it.

Bruce Reynolds
Click to expand...

db1yg said:
I did this conversion to the new fork about a year ago on my 9a---given the distance from Texas to Oregon (the location of the machine shop Vans recommends for the leg mod), the associated shipping costs, and the down time, I bought a threader and did it myself. We used a friends Harbor Freight electric hack saw table to cut off the 1" of leg. Much cutting oil and elbow grease on the thread cutting. Details are in the archives.

Reference the wheel pant attach brackets: I used the ones I had--simply drill out the rivets that attach them to your fg pant and convert the pant/bracket attach points to flush screws/nutplates. This way the bracket stays with the fork and you don't have to remove the axle when removing the nose pant. It really was not a big deal. BTW, this is now the standard method of attaching the pant on the newer A models.

Cheers,

db
Click to expand...

What's your secret, Dave? Bruce Reynolds (who works for Vans) says it's a waste time to try because the threading couldn't be done. Is it in the brand of threading die or is it that you used an adjustable die?

Thanks,

Mike
 
Operational Fix

Require an FV Nose Wheel Endorsement to fly a tri-gear RV. Having gone through Van's appeasement fixes (think airfilter by-pass) in the past, it is very possible that the fix will be worse then percieved problem. Requiring some demonstrated RV tri-gear landing skill to be authorized to fly a tri-gear RV might be a better way to go.

Does anyone know if there is a correlation between flipped RVs and electric pitch trim RVs?

Bob Axsom
 
alcladrv said:
What's your secret, Dave? Bruce Reynolds (who works for Vans) says it's a waste time to try because the threading couldn't be done. Is it in the brand of threading die or is it that you used an adjustable die?

Thanks,

Mike
Click to expand...

Hi Mike,

Just goes to show that I did not know that it could not be done!!

BTW, I know of at least one other person here in the San Antonio area who also did the same procedure on his A model. We both used his 24" die fixture, my die (if I remember correctly it was from San Tex Cutting Tools here in San Antonio), blocked the leg up tight in a vise, went slow, used lots of cutting oil, and made two or three passes to get full depth with the adjustable thread cutter. It was hard but doable--just go slow and test the nut after each pass--you want to insure the nut stays tight.

After two gear legs the die was used up!!!

I also talked with Tom Green at Vans before I started this (this was a year ago) to discuss what I intended to do and to insure the threads were simple "cut threads" vs "rolled threads"--they are cut.

Cheers,
db
 
You raise an interesting question, Bob. I thought about the trim issue. I have manual trim and find it easy to keep the stick forces light, when landing and taking off, making it easier to keep the wheel off the ground. I'm curious if the throw on the electric trim limits the effectiveness of the trim and if this could be a contributing factor, or if maybe trim isn't being effectively utilized in any case.

Roberta
 
This forks for you, landing too hard on the front gear

I removed my nose gear leg from my RV 7A over the weekend and sent it to Langair in a box I made to fit. If you send it, Langair has very specific directions on their website for mailing it. I initially used a piece of plywood and just duct taped the nose gear leg to it. What I did not think through is they need to get it back to you and want a screwed box so all they have to do is remove the screws. Then after the modification, put the rethreaded leg back in the box, put the screws back in and mail it. Put your name on the top and bottom of the box and Langair asked to put a return address in the box and a check for $75 in a plastic bag.

I called Vans today and the were there half an hour early to field fork orders. The cost is $154 and you will need new brackets for each side which are 14.65 each. I intend to use Vern Little's tip of putting cotton flux and resin in the nose of the fiberglass wheel pants to act as a skid if you do put the nose wheel in a gopher hole.

Steve Anderson
Finishing RV 7A
Lafayette La.
 
fl-mike said:
I sure would like to see "return parts for exchange" in the instructions for this mandatory service bulletin. If the design is deficient, seems like Van's ought to be making good on it.

I can imagine the response if Ford demanded that you to replace the tie rod on your year-old car, on your nickel.
Click to expand...
Fords come with a warranty, and the design must meet the design requirements imposed by the feds. RVs come with no warranty, and there are no design requirements. If you think you would be better off with an aircraft with a warranty and that meets design requirements, I suggest you compare the price and performance of the RVs against any type-certificated aircraft. If a warranty and design standards are important to you, then you have the wrong aircraft.

RV kits are sold at a much lower price than kits from other companies, as Van keeps his margins quite low. Would you rather he increased the prices to cover the costs of possible future SBs, or keep the prices low and expect the aircraft manufacturer (i.e. you) to cover the costs for recommended improvements?
 
Bob and Roberta:

One other thing that could be a factor in flips on grass strips is heavy braking. Shorter grass strips causing more brakes being used would definitely put more weight on the nosegear. Just the thing that Van's is stressing to eliminate.... Just a thought.
 
I have a 9A with electric trim. I have never even come close to using all the available trim. Plenty of control travel. I always land with very light stick forces. I wouldn't think this would be a factor unless you have a nose-heavy airplane. I'm powered by a lycoming 0320 with a Catto composite fixed pitch prop (3 blade). That combo is a bit lighter than the Sens. metal prop or 0360. My airplane weighs 1071 empty and 79.45" empty CG.
 
Nose Gear

I received my finish kit in Nov. 2004. Vans started shipping new style is early 2005. My complaint to Vans yesterday was why didn't they back order my nose wheel parts knowing they were making the change. I didn't install the landing gear until late 2005. I don't like the idea of sending parts from Atlanta to Oregon for threading. This will mean my plane will be on jacks for about two weeks or more. Vans support didn't know anything about the tapered pin thread when I asked them what they think of the idea. I suggested they monitor this site. If someone did there own thread cutting please let me know what the thread size is and what they name of the cutting tool manufacturer is.

Ron Russ RV9A
 
Don't trim..

ksouthar said:
I have a 9A with electric trim. I have never even come close to using all the available trim. Plenty of control travel. I always land with very light stick forces. I wouldn't think this would be a factor unless you have a nose-heavy airplane. I'm powered by a lycoming 0320 with a Catto composite fixed pitch prop (3 blade). That combo is a bit lighter than the Sens. metal prop or 0360. My airplane weighs 1071 empty and 79.45" empty CG.
Click to expand...


Guys, remember, when you trim for no resistance on final, the trim tab is down, so you have effectively removed some elevator. If you leave the trim alone there is a little back pressure required but it's so small and for such a short duration. In a forced off-field landing, trimming full down before the flare will give you the most effective elevator since the tab is now up. Just fight the stick forces because I think you can.

Regards,
 
I'd like to get the shipping crate built right away so it is ready when I pull the nose gear leg in the upcoming days. I have reviewed the procedure and crate drawing posted at Langair but understandably, they neglected to add dimensions.

What is the optimum size crate for shipping a U-603-2 (RV-6A)? I'm guessing 12"X38" should be in the ballpark, but I don't want to overbuild it and have to (potentially) pay additional shipping fees. Does 12"X38" sound about right or can it be made a bit smaller?
 
Nose leg price $195.00

Price for the nose leg price from Van's is 195.00, nose fork is 154.00 equals 349.00 plus shipping. Time involved for changing the units out and down time from flying est. 2 weeks. Going from a "better pilot" to an exceptional one, Priceless.

Tad Sargent
7A 350 hours on grass both wet and dry, short and long fields
rough and smooth surfaces

Aided 2 pilots in RV transition time in my airplane ( insert rough handling)

Silly me I thought the fuel tank SB was going to be difficult. Try removing a gear leg bolt where 33% of the weight is located from the inside. MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ME.
 
I agree Pierre...

pierre smith said:
Guys, remember, when you trim for no resistance on final, the trim tab is down, so you have effectively removed some elevator. If you leave the trim alone there is a little back pressure required but it's so small and for such a short duration. In a forced off-field landing, trimming full down before the flare will give you the most effective elevator since the tab is now up. Just fight the stick forces because I think you can.

Regards,
Click to expand...

I agree with this, I never trim except in cruise then I "man-handle her" in the pattern :D
 
Hate to bring up such an old subject but?

I was just going over my W&B again and remembered the issue with weight on the nose gear. Playing around with some numbers (like many have previously stated) I would need ~30 lbs in the baggage area with full fuel to be in specs. Does anyone have any additional information other than what was posted in this thread?
In particular, I'm wondering if Vern or anyone ever received any direct input from Van's as to why the allowable weight on the 9A nose gear was less than that for the 7A.
 
Engine Weight

My guess would be a reflection of a heaver engine on the 7's.

RV9
O-320 (150hp) 244 lb
O-320 (160hp) 255 lb
IO-320 (160hp) 259 lb

RV7
O-360 (180hp) 265 lb
IO-360 (180hp) 270 lb
IO-360 (200hp) 293 lb
 
BillC said:
I was just going over my W&B again and remembered the issue with weight on the nose gear. Playing around with some numbers (like many have previously stated) I would need ~30 lbs in the baggage area with full fuel to be in specs. Does anyone have any additional information other than what was posted in this thread?
In particular, I'm wondering if Vern or anyone ever received any direct input from Van's as to why the allowable weight on the 9A nose gear was less than that for the 7A.
Click to expand...

I never received a response on this issue. All of their other information cross-checked except for the -9A maximum nose gear load.

Vern
 
Thanks Vern,
That's what I thought since you never posted anything about a reply from them. I'm still perplexed about the difference. Engine weight should have nothing to do with it since it's stated as nose wheel weight. A heaver engine might put more weight on the gear but one would think that the gear itself should be rated to the same weight since they are the same parts. Oh well, I guess I'll just keep flying and landing like I have been and forget about trying to understand it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top