Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:02 AM - Re: Outrigger legs (William Mills)
2. 02:12 AM - Re: Outrigger legs (William Mills)
3. 02:19 AM - Re: Outrigger legs (William Mills)
4. 02:22 AM - Re: Outrigger legs (William Mills)
5. 03:45 AM - Outrigger legs (Justin Kennedy)
6. 07:38 AM - Don't shoot the messenger! Mono Nylon stabiliser legs.... (R.C.Harrison)
7. 07:47 AM - Reamer for mod 72 (Richard Iddon)
8. 09:16 AM - Re: *SPAM* Reamer for mod 72 (danny@mcwalterscafe.co.uk)
9. 03:13 PM - Woodcomp propeller controls (Graham Higgins)
10. 04:43 PM - Redux crystals (Fred Klein)
11. 11:23 PM - Re: Woodcomp propeller controls (William Mills)
12. 11:47 PM - Re: Redux crystals (William Mills)
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Outrigger legs |
The original length seems to work alright and will take 90 degs of bending
without affecting the ends. However, as the largest bending moment is at
the top, I would suggest you allow for a little more penetration at the top
rather than at the fork end.
Regards,
William
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Sarangan" <asarangan@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 6:49 PM
Subject: Europa-List: Outrigger legs
>
> Just curious why the full depth available in OR1 and the wheel fork are
> not utilized by the nylon legs. The nylon rod is inserted only part way
> into the sockets and the bolt holes are drilled just 5mm from the rod
> ends. This design seems a bit strange to me.
>
> I am thinking of buying slightly longer rods and using the full socket
> lengths for better support of the legs.
>
> Also, why nylon? It would seem that a hollow aluminum tube or even PVC
> might provide better strength and ligher weight.
>
>
> --
> 12:17
>
>
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: Outrigger legs |
If you are unluckily enough to ground loop in a strong cross wind, it is
very likely you will grind away the forward face of the fairing. I have
repaired my port fairing twice now!
I think you should be able to achieve both wheels touching with the standard
legs and as mentioned previously, it is not necessary to have full
penetration (if you will pardon the expression!) of the nylon rod into the
sockets.
My first pair of standard legs lasted for 1100 hours, but eventually took up
a permanent set into a curve, that reduced their effective length, so I have
just replaced them and it has made handling on take-off and landing more
positive.
Regards,
William
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Klein" <fklein@orcasonline.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 9:25 PM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Outrigger legs
>
> Andrew,
>
> I too was surprised at what you've determined...particularly if the rod is
> subject to the 90 degree bending which Graham describes.
>
> If (presumably momentary) bending is to the 90 degree extreme, I can't
> help but wonder if the forward portion of the speed kit fairing doesn't
> get ground away...(?...Does this in fact occur?)
>
> Since mono-flyers have advised to NOT make the final drilling of the rods
> until the plane is sitting on the gear w/ full weight in order to assure
> that the outrigger wheels can both touch the pavement at the same time for
> optimal ground handling, I will probably be ordering longer lengths of rod
> in order to effect full bearing within the wheel fork...although I have no
> idea whether mono-flyers routinely have done so.
>
> Any comments from currently flying mono-guys?
>
> Fred
>
> On Thursday, May 17, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>
>>
>> Just curious why the full depth available in OR1 and the wheel fork are
>> not utilized by the nylon legs.
>
>
> --
> 269.7.0/803 - Release Date: 13/05/2007 12:17
>
>
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: Outrigger legs |
No need to replace the legs, just drill new holes to realign the wheels,
which worked alright for me and didn't seem to weaken the fixing. (1100
hours without a problem) It is important to make sure the wheels track
correctly, otherwise the outrigger tyres will wear on one side very badly.
Regards,
William
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Sarangan" <asarangan@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 10:56 PM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Outrigger legs
>
> I was not aware of this advice to not drill the rods until the final
> phase. Well, mine is done, so I may have to buy a new set of rods when
> the time comes.
>
>
> --- Fred Klein <fklein@orcasonline.com> wrote:
>
>> <fklein@orcasonline.com>
>>
>> Andrew,
>>
>> I too was surprised at what you've determined...particularly if the
>> rod
>> is subject to the 90 degree bending which Graham describes.
>>
>> If (presumably momentary) bending is to the 90 degree extreme, I
>> can't
>> help but wonder if the forward portion of the speed kit fairing
>> doesn't
>> get ground away...(?...Does this in fact occur?)
>>
>> Since mono-flyers have advised to NOT make the final drilling of the
>> rods until the plane is sitting on the gear w/ full weight in order
>> to
>> assure that the outrigger wheels can both touch the pavement at the
>> same time for optimal ground handling, I will probably be ordering
>> longer lengths of rod in order to effect full bearing within the
>> wheel
>> fork...although I have no idea whether mono-flyers routinely have
>> done
>> so.
>>
>> Any comments from currently flying mono-guys?
>>
>> Fred
>>
>> On Thursday, May 17, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>>
>> > <asarangan@yahoo.com>
>> >
>> > Just curious why the full depth available in OR1 and the wheel fork
>> are
>> > not utilized by the nylon legs.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 12:17
>
>
Message 4
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: Outrigger legs |
I made mine touch the ground when empty plus fuel etc, but I don't think
it is that sensitive.
Regards,
William
----- Original Message -----
From: Tom Friedland
To: europa-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Outrigger legs
My builders manual does not say to wait until the final phase to drill
the rods and certainly nothing about being sure that both outrigger
wheels can reach the ground when rigged.
Should the leg length reach the ground when the aircraft is empty?
With one person on board or two? With a full tank of fuel?
I drilled the legs to the measurement called for in the manual and
since I put a tire (tyre?) on that is larger in diameter, my legs are
probably too short.
Tom Friedland
On 5/17/07, Andrew Sarangan <asarangan@yahoo.com> wrote:
<asarangan@yahoo.com >
I was not aware of this advice to not drill the rods until the final
phase. Well, mine is done, so I may have to buy a new set of rods
when
the time comes.
--- Fred Klein < fklein@orcasonline.com> wrote:
> <fklein@orcasonline.com>
>
> Andrew,
>
> I too was surprised at what you've determined...particularly if
the
> rod
> is subject to the 90 degree bending which Graham describes.
>
> If (presumably momentary) bending is to the 90 degree extreme, I
> can't
> help but wonder if the forward portion of the speed kit fairing
> doesn't
> get ground away...(?...Does this in fact occur?)
>
> Since mono-flyers have advised to NOT make the final drilling of
the
> rods until the plane is sitting on the gear w/ full weight in
order
> to
> assure that the outrigger wheels can both touch the pavement at
the
> same time for optimal ground handling, I will probably be ordering
> longer lengths of rod in order to effect full bearing within the
> wheel
> fork...although I have no idea whether mono-flyers routinely have
> done
> so.
>
> Any comments from currently flying mono-guys?
>
> Fred
>
> On Thursday, May 17, 2007, at 10:49 AM, Andrew Sarangan wrote:
>
> > <asarangan@yahoo.com>
> >
> > Just curious why the full depth available in OR1 and the wheel
fork
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
13/05/2007 12:17
Message 5
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 |
|
Hi All
I will be going to Wick, weather permitting, so hope to meet up with you
Northern Lights Tour boys then.
Outrigger Legs
My outrigger legs had to be drilled very close to the end to make them
long enough. If I could buy a set of new ones that were say 2 inches
longer. I would. They would then have a more satisfactory seating in the
top housing. I worry that they are only just in far enough though I have
had a heavy landing or three and they haven't given up.
The other great outrigger mystery is the toe in. In an attempt to work
out exactly how much toe in was required to stop the wheels being warn
unevenly I came up with a revelation. If you draw the tracking out on
paper or CAD it shows that you need some toe out. However in practice
you need toe in as the outriggers are being worn more on the inboard
side. I can't get to the bottom if this one at all.
I don't intend to bother with it anymore and set a 5 degree toe in which
I think will be the practical answer.
If I have missed something here please tell me.
Aileron sealing.
I was speaking to a Long EZ man who said the whole sealing aileron thing
had caused a big stir with them some time back.
Their ailerons are hinged at the top in the same way as ours are at the
bottom. One of the ways they seal them was to put cling film along the
outside if the hinge line gap and squeeze a small bead of silicon
sealant on the inside for the whole length. Remove excess with finger.
Then pull of the cling film off when it is set. Flexible sealed joint
results.
Sounds good but I couldn't find anyone who had actually done it this
way. Just thought I would mention it.
Cheers
Justin
G-ZTED Classic Monowheel 912S Airmaster.
Message 6
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: | Don't shoot the messenger! Mono Nylon stabiliser legs.... |
Hi! All
ROGER Cullum Builder 100 has requested me to place a message here
concerning the tread which has been running on suitability of the nylon
supplied by Europa for Mono Kits.
In his opinion he can't see why the 30 year tried and tested Schriber
Motorfalk Glider legs couldn't be used for this function. Unfortunately
he hasn't the material specification but thinks it to be alkathyne
tubing. They seemingly have been known to accommodate the usual gliding
away landings such as rough fields c/w mole hills etc. etc.
Regards
Bob Harrison 337 G-PTAG
Message 7
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: | Reamer for mod 72 |
Hi everyone.
I have been away for a bit and only just re-subscribed to the forum.
I understand that the club has a couple of 16.5mm. reamers for doing mod
72. How do I get hold of one?
Richard Iddon G-RIXS
17/05/2007 17:18
Message 8
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: Reamer for mod 72 |
Hi Richard,
Get in touch with Pete Jeffers, he sent me one which
I sent on to the next builder.
Cheers Danny G-c.e.r.i.
Richard Iddon wrote:
>
> Hi everyone.
>
>
>
> I have been away for a bit and only just re-subscribed to the forum.
>
>
>
> I understand that the club has a couple of 16.5mm. reamers for doing
> mod 72. How do I get hold of one?
>
>
>
> Richard Iddon G-RIXS
>
>
> 17/05/2007 17:18
> *
>
>
> *
Message 9
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: | Woodcomp propeller controls |
Does anyone have any info or experience in using the reverse thrust in
anger? My experience of being unable to stop on rollout,( aborted takeoff)
and hitting that cane drain, has been relived many times. It is not a
pleasant experience( broken back, broken aircraft). I have often wondered if
reverse thrust prop would have been more effective than the single mono
wheel brake on dew laden grass, lightly loaded aircraft.
I would imagine the aerodynamics involved would be rather complex.
Graham Higgins in Oz, still rebuilding.
Message 10
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 |
|
Seems I recall some posts regarding "cooking" redux to remove crystals
in Redux/Araldite but darned if I can find them w/ our search engine.
When I've mixed up a small batch recently and seem to have created some
small, flat flakes which concerns me...are these the crystals some have
posted about? The yellow paste seems fine coming out of the can...nice
and gooey w/ no solids. These flakes seem to form after I've added the
hardener and mixed it with the paste. Can anyone give me either a heads
up warning, reassurances, and/or a "fix"?
Fred
cockpit module
On Friday, May 18, 2007, at 03:11 PM, Graham Higgins wrote:
> <ghiggins@nsw.chariot.net.au>
>
> Does anyone have any info or experience in using the reverse thrust in
> anger? My experience of being unable to stop on rollout,( aborted
> takeoff) and hitting that cane drain, has been relived many times. It
> is not a pleasant experience( broken back, broken aircraft). I have
> often wondered if reverse thrust prop would have been more effective
> than the single mono wheel brake on dew laden grass, lightly loaded
> aircraft.
> I would imagine the aerodynamics involved would be rather complex.
> Graham Higgins in Oz, still rebuilding.
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
Message 11
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: Woodcomp propeller controls |
Hi Graham,
Very sorry to hear of your mishap, particularly your back injury and I hope
you have now recovered and will soon be back in the air.
I have a mono with a Woodcomp SR 3000/3 with reverse and I use it every time
I land at my strip instead of using the brake (obstacles on both
approaches). It is extremely effective for stopping, but whether I could
activate it quickly enough for an abortive take-off (in a panic), is an
unknown. For safety reasons there are a sequence of actions before reverse
can be activated; U/C down, mode switch changed, throttle closed, guard
lifted and reverse switch activated. All but the last two can be done in
preparation for landing.
Of course the U/C will already be down and no doubt you will close the
throttle instinctively when you decide to abort, so if you can do the
others, the prop will go into reverse in under two seconds. If you are
thinking clearly and have quick reactions, I imagine it is do-able.
The mono is extra wobbly on tarmac (because of reduced rudder authority),
but most hard runways are long enough anyway. On grass it is fine, once the
roll-out has been established. It is also very effective for losing height
in the air (VSI off the clock), but Woodcomp forbid this (no doubt because
of litigation) and the PFA exclude it on the "Limitations" placard. I have
never had the courage to try a landing, in case there is insufficient energy
for the round-out, but it might be OK if 80 knots is maintained all the way
down the glide path. Apparently, C 130s can land in reverse for extremely
short landings; perhaps Nigel can comment on this.
Regards,
William
----- Original Message -----
From: "Graham Higgins" <ghiggins@nsw.chariot.net.au>
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 11:11 PM
Subject: Europa-List: Woodcomp propeller controls
> <ghiggins@nsw.chariot.net.au>
>
> Does anyone have any info or experience in using the reverse thrust in
> anger? My experience of being unable to stop on rollout,( aborted
> takeoff) and hitting that cane drain, has been relived many times. It is
> not a pleasant experience( broken back, broken aircraft). I have often
> wondered if reverse thrust prop would have been more effective than the
> single mono wheel brake on dew laden grass, lightly loaded aircraft.
> I would imagine the aerodynamics involved would be rather complex.
> Graham Higgins in Oz, still rebuilding.
>
>
> --
> 269.7.3/809 - Release Date: 17/05/2007 17:18
>
>
Message 12
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: Redux crystals |
Fred,
The crystals are hard, they form on the top of the resin like a crust and
convert any residue on the sides of the container, but they will disperse if
you lower the container into hot or near boiling water for a while. It
works well and apparently does not affect the quality of resin. However, I
have never experienced flakes forming after mixing. Perhaps it is something
to do with the hardener?
Regards,
William
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Klein" <fklein@orcasonline.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2007 12:42 AM
Subject: Europa-List: Redux crystals
>
> Seems I recall some posts regarding "cooking" redux to remove crystals in
> Redux/Araldite but darned if I can find them w/ our search engine. When
> I've mixed up a small batch recently and seem to have created some small,
> flat flakes which concerns me...are these the crystals some have posted
> about? The yellow paste seems fine coming out of the can...nice and gooey
> w/ no solids. These flakes seem to form after I've added the hardener and
> mixed it with the paste. Can anyone give me either a heads up warning,
> reassurances, and/or a "fix"?
>
> Fred
> cockpit module
>
> On Friday, May 18, 2007, at 03:11 PM, Graham Higgins wrote:
>
>> <ghiggins@nsw.chariot.net.au>
>>
>> Does anyone have any info or experience in using the reverse thrust in
>> anger? My experience of being unable to stop on rollout,( aborted
>> takeoff) and hitting that cane drain, has been relived many times. It is
>> not a pleasant experience( broken back, broken aircraft). I have often
>> wondered if reverse thrust prop would have been more effective than the
>> single mono wheel brake on dew laden grass, lightly loaded aircraft.
>> I would imagine the aerodynamics involved would be rather complex.
>> Graham Higgins in Oz, still rebuilding.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> believed to be clean.
>>
>
>
> --
> 269.7.3/809 - Release Date: 17/05/2007 17:18
>
>
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! --
|