Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:35 AM - Re: Re: web site (nico css)
2. 11:12 AM - Re: Re: Subscriptions (nico css)
3. 08:41 PM - Re: SB-90C THE STRAIGHT SKINNY!! (yourtcfg@aol.com)
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Chris,
I am not hosting the site, it's being hosted by LogicalSolutions in
Rochester NY (at least that's to whom the IP address is pointing) with
Jeffrey Cagwin listed as the Technical Contact (1-585-244-9930). I never
heard of him. Currently there are no complaints about the hosting service. I
have full FTP access to the web server and experienced no problems with
accessing the site.
I inherited the banner ads and since someone else appears to be adding new
content, I thought it best not mess with them. My (and my staff whom I
oftentimes use) labor is free for the Group because I'd like to see the site
become something of value for all. If there is money exchanging hands for
the advertising privileges, it's not at my end and I have no control over
that. Personally, I don't care if the Group gives advertising space away to
make the site more attractive for this small band of fanatics, but if money
exchanges hands, I would recommend that full disclosure is maintained. I
just don't have that information.
Currently I am not utilizing web authoring tools but my shop is geared at
developing directly in the current scripting platforms (customers'
privilege). It's just the manner in which we are set up. What I am working
towards is much like a Wiki-type experience, except that folks wouldn't be
able to edit others' work. Pilot A would, for instance, submit a story. It
would end up in a moderator's inbox who edits it a little bit for language
(pilots do not necessary come from the English classroom) and check that the
submission is in line with the kind of content that belongs on the site in
terms of usefulness and interest. Once the moderator checks the box that
approves the submission, it is automatically posted to the page's content
files. No messing with the HTML or other scripting code of the site,
guaranteeing it's integrity and stability.
If the Group would like to comment on the designs before roll-out, I'd
recommend that we nominate a few persons who get access the to the
development platform (which I created on the existing web server) who would
check and sign-off on new developments and changes.
Right now I just steam ahead and roll out what I think is best and if there
are changes, I apply them as soon as I can. If that's OK, then that's good
too. I don't mind working alone - we are making a living in this space, so
we won't be too far off too often.
Just my thoughts. I hope I have addressed some of your concerns, Chris.
Thanks
Nico
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2008 2:46 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Re: web site
nico css wrote:
> I would like to continue with the redesign of the site's architecture
> so that new features are not additional add-ons but part of the
architecture.
Nico,
What tools are you using these days for web authoring? I agree absolutely
with a well-thought-out structure. Back when I was doing the web site, I
was generating all the framework HTML by hand, so the behind-the-scenes file
and directory structure was critical to being able to maintain the site. I
accepted word documents as submissions along with individual image files so
that I could simply save the document as HTML, add in some IMG tags, and
plop it in the proper directory.
Surely things are even easier now, but I have to admit that I haven't looked
at any authoring tools in many a year.
Unless modification tracking and management tools are much better than
they were 5 years ago, I don't think it would be wise to allow open
modifications (although it might be interesting if you had a rigidly
controlled group of "maintainers" who could all edit at will - ie: the
wikipedia model).
How about providing site framework structure of some type so that people who
are interested in submitting new data (or entire pages) would have a
reference to work off of. Would that make your life easier as far as
integrating new content? The software modification management tools that I
use would allow someone to download a section of the site, edit, them
re-submit for your approval without any risk of mangling the online copy.
I was wondering about all the banner ads too.... I thought you were hosting
the site pro-bono for the TCFG? If so, get rid of them unless they're
directly paying either you or the FG.
chris
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Subscriptions |
Thanks, Milt.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N395V
Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2008 5:52 AM
Subject: Commander-List: Re: Subscriptions
--> <Bearcat@bearcataviation.com>
Nico,
Thats because when you signed up it was just an e mail list. Quite some time
ago Matt sent out a form to sign up as a bulletin board.
> Why do I need to register at all?
> You may not have to -- it is up to the administrator of the board as to
whether you need to register in order to post messages. However,
registration will give you access to additional features not available to
guest users such as definable avatar images, private messaging, emailing to
fellow users, usergroup subscription, etc. It only takes a few minutes to
register so it is recommended you do so.
>
--------
Milt
2003 F1 Rocket
2006 Radial Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=186651#186651
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: SB-90C THE STRAIGHT SKINNY!! |
HELLO... First, in my earlier post?I stated that it was not necessary to remove
the center fuel tank to accomplish SB90C/D.? That is true,? Both SBs are to inspect
only the?FORWARD spar cap radius, at wing?station 24:00.? There is no radius
on the back side of the spar, hence, no inspection.? Quoting from SB90C,
dated 5-30-1992 , page 1? "airplanes are being included in this SB for continuing
inspection of the FRONT SPAR, LOWER CAP, FORWARD FLANGE at wing station 24:00.??SB90C
was to be accomplished within 50 flight hours of the issuance of
AD 94-04-13, back in 1994.? The first time either SB is done, it is required that
the center fuel tank be removed (long bodied airframes only)?to facilitate
the installation of?Commander service kit (90C-1,2,3 OR -4 by S/N) and modify
the existing structure? Again quoting from SB90C, page 6, part L, "Modify channel
sections removed in step (e), to facilitate later inspections".? Once this
kit is in place,?and the modification complete,?it
is no longer necessary to remove?any fuel tanks to do the required inspection
as the above mentioned kits install a doubler with an access hole?so the inspection
can be performed.? An important note.? AD 94-03-13 still refers to SB 90C,
not 90D.? This is important in that the time requirements between inspections
are those of 90C, not D.? Also, while 90D does extend the time between inspections
from 500hr to 750hr (normal use), a good thing, it adds an onerous calendar
inspection requirement of 60 months (I am working from memory here so...)
a bad thing.? Should 90D be referenced in a revised AD, Most of us would be
required to do this expensive and largely unnecessary inspection much more frequently.??Any
Commander that has been in?continuous service since AD 94-04-13
was published certainly would have the proper service kit installed?and the?modification
complete?and therefore would not require the?fuel tank to be removed.?
jb????
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris <cschuerm@cox.net>
Sent: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 6:31 pm
Subject: Re: Commander-List: SB-90C
?
Tylor Hall wrote:?
> Chris,?
> you make a good point about having the AD's on the web site or the > links to
the FAA web site.?
> This is a resource that we need to have reference to. ?
I agree absolutely Tylor. Unfortunately, the AD's by themselves are not terribly
useful (assuming you can even find them on the atrocity the FAA calls a web
site). Many of them just mandate compliance with a SB without including the actual
text. The best solution (ie: highest value to Commander owners) would be
to place an actual copy of all the SBs and ADs on the Commander web site itself
rather than trying to create outside links. Surely Twin Commander could supply
the SB's in electronic form????
?
chris?
?
?
?
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|