What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Before you start your wing - considerations

B

brunodom

I'm New Here
Sponsor
Hi,

I am approaching the halfway of my empanage construction and am already evaluating what I should consider in my wings before I place the order. Here is the list of things I am considering, and I ask you if you also have some items that are not listed. You think that I should consider - your experience is also highly appreciated if you have with these items and others that you may have:

- Extended Range fuel tanks: I am considering the Sky Design Extended Range Fuel Tank
- Aileron Bell Crank Bracket kit: I found this design way superior to what we have in the standard kit. It may not make a real difference on the controls or reliability - I saw these from Sky Desing that I am considering using;
- Fuel sensors: The Cies look pretty reliable as it is based on magnet-resistive instead of mechanical-resistive. (https://ciescorp.net/products/magneto-resistive-fuel-liquid-level/models-specifications/)
- Usage of Nutring instead of nut plates inside the fuel tank: It looks like a much better approach to serve the fuel sensor. I found this one in the description of this video posted on Youtube
- Four fuel sensors instead of 2: I looked at several discussion threads, and so far, it looks like the Garmin GX3 can handle four sensors (two per wing/fuel tank), and it is more precise.
- Wingtips: I liked the AeroLEDS Aerosun VXI model. They have an option for carbon fiber and fiberglass, and I assume carbon fiber is better. Do you have any educated opinion here?

What else should I consider that is not on this list? Do you have any experience with these items or their equivalents? I hope this list also can be helpful for those in preparation to place the wings order and consider all the parts and design considerations before starting.

Best Regards!
-Bruno Domingues
 
brunodom said:
Hi,

I am approaching the halfway of my empanage construction and am already evaluating what I should consider in my wings before I place the order. Here is the list of things I am considering, and I ask you if you also have some items that are not listed. You think that I should consider - your experience is also highly appreciated if you have with these items and others that you may have:

- Extended Range fuel tanks: I am considering the Sky Design Extended Range Fuel Tank
- Aileron Bell Crank Bracket kit: I found this design way superior to what we have in the standard kit. It may not make a real difference on the controls or reliability - I saw these from Sky Desing that I am considering using;
- Fuel sensors: The Cies look pretty reliable as it is based on magnet-resistive instead of mechanical-resistive. (https://ciescorp.net/products/magneto-resistive-fuel-liquid-level/models-specifications/)
- Usage of Nutring instead of nut plates inside the fuel tank: It looks like a much better approach to serve the fuel sensor. I found this one in the description of this video posted on Youtube
- Four fuel sensors instead of 2: I looked at several discussion threads, and so far, it looks like the Garmin GX3 can handle four sensors (two per wing/fuel tank), and it is more precise.
- Wingtips: I liked the AeroLEDS Aerosun VXI model. They have an option for carbon fiber and fiberglass, and I assume carbon fiber is better. Do you have any educated opinion here?

What else should I consider that is not on this list? Do you have any experience with these items or their equivalents? I hope this list also can be helpful for those in preparation to place the wings order and consider all the parts and design considerations before starting.

Best Regards!
-Bruno Domingues
Click to expand...
I don't have any experience with any of these yet but I'm choosing all the same options for my -14A except I'm going with the fiberglass Aerosun VXi wingtips because I know how to work with fiberglass and have the supplies for it. I've never worked with CF.
 
Last edited:
brunodom said:
Hi,

I am approaching the halfway of my empanage construction and am already evaluating what I should consider in my wings before I place the order. Here is the list of things I am considering, and I ask you if you also have some items that are not listed. You think that I should consider - your experience is also highly appreciated if you have with these items and others that you may have:

- Extended Range fuel tanks: I am considering the Sky Design Extended Range Fuel Tank
- Aileron Bell Crank Bracket kit: I found this design way superior to what we have in the standard kit. It may not make a real difference on the controls or reliability - I saw these from Sky Desing that I am considering using;
- Fuel sensors: The Cies look pretty reliable as it is based on magnet-resistive instead of mechanical-resistive. (https://ciescorp.net/products/magneto-resistive-fuel-liquid-level/models-specifications/)
- Usage of Nutring instead of nut plates inside the fuel tank: It looks like a much better approach to serve the fuel sensor. I found this one in the description of this video posted on Youtube
- Four fuel sensors instead of 2: I looked at several discussion threads, and so far, it looks like the Garmin GX3 can handle four sensors (two per wing/fuel tank), and it is more precise.
- Wingtips: I liked the AeroLEDS Aerosun VXI model. They have an option for carbon fiber and fiberglass, and I assume carbon fiber is better. Do you have any educated opinion here?

What else should I consider that is not on this list? Do you have any experience with these items or their equivalents? I hope this list also can be helpful for those in preparation to place the wings order and consider all the parts and design considerations before starting.

Best Regards!
-Bruno Domingues
Click to expand...
Definite yes to the ER tanks. Minimal extra work, negligible extra weight - for lots of extra utility.

I went with 2x SW senders per tank. I’ve got a write up here somewhere on wiring them in series and passing through the signal.
If you don’t with the ER tanks you will read full on your gauges for many many gallons.
It’s not a big deal in the scheme of things but an easy problem to solve.

I only looked very briefly at the cies senders. If they were half the price they’d still be 5x too expensive. I see no point blowing thousands of dollars on senders.
solution in search of a problem IMHO. If you’ve got money to burn, burn avgas instead.

I like the idea of the bellcrank brackets and they are beautifully made and a much more elegant design than the original- like all of Ken’s designs. But I think unnecessary in an RV10 and you wouldn’t be able to tell one from the other in service.
A much bigger problem in need of a solution is the stick base bushings in RV10s (and RV6/7/9). They fixed this in the 14.

If you plan on a carbon fiber 3rd party wingtip then you won’t be able to put an archer antenna in the tip - if you’re considering a VOR. Worth thinking about.

Maybe think about your Pitot mast and mount while you’re at it. I’d consider some reinforcing of the skins at the mast base regardless of brand of mast.

Good luck!
 
CF is not “better”, but trendy.
CF is stronger in some directions.
It’s stiffer and harder to form.
And opaque. IMO no advantage in a wingtip. Others might find some reason to use it for the application. Interested in other opinions. Bad news if you want radio waves inside.
 
BruceW said:
Nope on all of it, IMO. Wing tips and fuel sensors are WAY too much $'s.
Standard tanks have 4+ hours VFR range. I need to get our a pee by then anyway. :p
Click to expand...
I agree with the mindset of wanting to stretch my legs and go pee after three hours. That being said, there are two reasons I am going the ER tank route. First is safety and convenience - for flights to places like Alaska, where the weather can turn quickly, or places like the Bahamas, where they don’t have the 100LL they said they would, it’s nice to have options by having an extra two hours of fuel on board just in case. The other is the ability to fill up more with cheap(er) fuel when going on trips.
 
BruceW said:
Nope on all of it, IMO. Wing tips and fuel sensors are WAY too much $'s.
Standard tanks have 4+ hours VFR range. I need to get our an pee by then anyway. :p
Click to expand...

I'm in Bruce's camp here, with exception of I would probably do extended range tanks. Not to be a debbie downer as there are lots of cool custom things available, but after flying for 4 years, Mr V came up with a pretty dang good plane. I spent way more time looking at options than I needed, and if I would have incorporated all of them, I might still be building!

Most of my deviations came in the interior appointments - got most of the aerosport offerings.

Agree with the Pitot Mast - originally went Graetz, but melted the body - the heated garmin was easy replacement using same mast. I think most of the pitot masts tie into the spar with a reinforcing plate and are standard size (Dynon/Advanced/Graetz/Garmin)

Phil
KBTF
Salt Lake City
RV-10 Built/Flying
Murphy Moose Building
 
I find it interesting that folks downplay ER tanks because the need for bathroom breaks outweighs the advantage of increased range. There are many reasons for wanting ER tanks. For me, flying longer legs is the least important of them.
 
I am an A&P mechanic and I explored the possibility of adding an additional (yes/no) optical fuel sensor to my certified aircraft. I had a conversation with the repair station I/A about adding this device. He pointed out that I was about to upgrade my panel to include the Electronics International engine monitor, and their fuel flow sensor. He pointed out that the EI fuel flow sensor is SO ACCURATE, that I would quickly find it unnecessary. He pointed out that the Garmin display uses the same EI sensor and he has regularly seen it accurate to within 1 gallon on 200 gallons of flow.

We are all extremely concerned with how much fuel we have, and how much do we have left. I think you need to decide what you are planning for fuel flow and engine monitoring before you commit to all this additional expense and work. Take a look at the EI flow sensor and decide how you intend to monitor your engine. Depending on how you decide that, I think the extra work and expense you are considering, is just that, extra.
 
bertschb said:
The "manufacturer" of the ER tanks (Ken) helped design the RV-10 and RV-14.
Click to expand...
Genuinely curious then, if it’s not a structural or flight characteristics issue, and he helped design it in the first place, why wasn’t it originally designed with 40 gallon tanks, or at least offer it as a factory option?
 
I am building a RV14A. I am going with the nutrings, however, everything else stock. I thought about ER tanks, however, since my aircraft will be aerobatic, I decided against it and maintain Van's standard as that is how it was flight tested. I'm also sticking with FG wing tips as I plan to put my VOR antenna and tailbeacon X in the wing tips.
 
Megan995 said:
Genuinely curious then, if it’s not a structural or flight characteristics issue, and he helped design it in the first place, why wasn’t it originally designed with 40 gallon tanks, or at least offer it as a factory option?
Click to expand...
The factory 50 gallon fuel capacity is actually pretty generous and I would guess is more than enough fuel capacity for 90% of owners. The trade off in increasing the fuel capacity, of course, is useful load.
 
Last edited:
Megan995 said:
Genuinely curious then, if it’s not a structural or flight characteristics issue, and he helped design it in the first place, why wasn’t it originally designed with 40 gallon tanks, or at least offer it as a factory option?
Click to expand...


Ask Ken
I suspect gross weight.
He’s done an extensive engineering analysis of the ER tanks. Including modal impact testing. It’s all documented and freely available.
I have no doubt that there’s little to fear from the addition of the ER tanks other than gross weight considerations - which he has addressed too.
It’s a no brainer where I live. I regularly do out and back 2.5hr trips to strips where there’s no fuel.
 
brunodom said:
Hi,

I am approaching the halfway of my empanage construction and am already evaluating what I should consider in my wings before I place the order. Here is the list of things I am considering, and I ask you if you also have some items that are not listed. You think that I should consider - your experience is also highly appreciated if you have with these items and others that you may have:

- Extended Range fuel tanks: I am considering the Sky Design Extended Range Fuel Tank
- Aileron Bell Crank Bracket kit: I found this design way superior to what we have in the standard kit. It may not make a real difference on the controls or reliability - I saw these from Sky Desing that I am considering using;
- Fuel sensors: The Cies look pretty reliable as it is based on magnet-resistive instead of mechanical-resistive. (https://ciescorp.net/products/magneto-resistive-fuel-liquid-level/models-specifications/)
- Usage of Nutring instead of nut plates inside the fuel tank: It looks like a much better approach to serve the fuel sensor. I found this one in the description of this video posted on Youtube
- Four fuel sensors instead of 2: I looked at several discussion threads, and so far, it looks like the Garmin GX3 can handle four sensors (two per wing/fuel tank), and it is more precise.
- Wingtips: I liked the AeroLEDS Aerosun VXI model. They have an option for carbon fiber and fiberglass, and I assume carbon fiber is better. Do you have any educated opinion here?

What else should I consider that is not on this list? Do you have any experience with these items or their equivalents? I hope this list also can be helpful for those in preparation to place the wings order and consider all the parts and design considerations before starting.

Best Regards!
-Bruno Domingues
Click to expand...
There really isn't a downside to the ER tanks; I have the HWA ER tanks and use them all of the time. Had the SkyDesigns been available, I would have went that route.

Bellcrank kit look really nice. If building again, I'd probably use it. I wish they made a bearing supported control stick base. I think that would be a better design, by far.

The dual Cies senders would be nice but aren't really necessary. The fuel flow totalizer is VERY accurate, and whatever sensor you choose will show how much fuel is left when it really matters. My Princeton capacitive senders show the last 17 gallons on each side.

As far as wingtips go, I have the stock F/G ones. I did add a layer of SORIC on the inside to increase the rigidity. The stock F/G is pretty flimsy, especially if it is sitting in the sun. There have been stories of people inadvertently leaning on the F/G tip, causing it to flex enough to crack the paint. Anecdotal but something to consider. CF isn't necessarily better, however, it will most certainly be more expensive.

For the guys saying that all the mods are too expensive, that is an opinion and nothing more. Personally, when I built my -10, I WANTED all the mods including awesome panel, leather, heated seats, CF panel, full interior and carpet, ER tanks, etc. I think if you look at most of the -10s out there, you will find that there are relatively few "stock" ones compared to fully loaded ones. Again, a personal preference and decision.
 
philb said:
Pitot Mast - originally went Graetz, but melted the body - the heated garmin was easy replacement using same mast. I think most of the pitot masts tie into the spar with a reinforcing plate and are standard size (Dynon/Advanced/Graetz/Garmin)
Click to expand...
Just to clarify what melted... Pitot tube or pitot mast? Haven't wired it yet, but my Graetz pitot has an electronic control module I thought is supposed to regulate temps. Any info appreciated
 
Tall_Order said:
Just to clarify what melted... Pitot tube or pitot mast? Haven't wired it yet, but my Graetz pitot has an electronic control module I thought is supposed to regulate temps. Any info appreciated
Click to expand...
Sorry, yes, the composite pitot body.

Had the ECM wired and thought working well, until airspeed went to 0 at 13000 feet in cold precip. That was fun. Got to ground and it was all melted. Never blew a circuit. No support from Graetz on troubleshooting so swapped to garmin using same mast.

Phil
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top