Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:28 AM - Re: Emailing: 51b7gmpPjhL._SL500_AA300_.jpg (Martin Olliver)
2. 08:02 AM - Re: Trial fitting cockpit module (Andrew Sarangan)
3. 09:18 AM - Re: Trial fitting cockpit module (Bud Yerly)
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: Emailing: 51b7gmpPjhL._SL500_AA300_.jpg |
[quote="kheindl(at)msn.com"]It pumps up from the wing. We use it for fuel but it
is really meant just for water.I have repaired mine several times and now it
has a pinhole in the hose. Construction quality is very poor, but it's useful
when it works. Typical Chinese junk.
I currently use two 20 l fuel cans but fill them just over halfway to make them
easy to lift and hold.
The suggestion of pressurizing a sealed fuel can is best, using a mini rechargeable
or powered from the car cigarette lighter compressor.
Karl
I agree with you Karl. I had another system pressurizing a jerry can using a double
chamber foot pump metal valve in the cap and tube to bottom of jerry can.
This worked a treat even for a high wing aircraft (Luscombe).
Another system that works well for low wing aircraft if you have storage, is to
fabricate a stand with a large 3 point base. Make sure the platform at the top
is higer than the fuel filler hole. Convert a jerry can cap to take a spiggot
with fuel hose attached with a fuel tap at the end (to shut down fuel flow in
a hurry to stop over filling). Making sure structure is earthed. Then just let
gravety do the work. Simple, no moving parts and cheep!
Martin.
> Subject: Europa-List: Re: Emailing: 51b7gmpPjhL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
> From: martflynut@aol.com
> Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 08:48:31 -0700
> To: europa-list@matronics.com
>
>
> I think it only pumps to create a siphon. I have read the manufactures blurb
but have not seen one in the flesh. Could someone confirm this?
> Rgds to all
> Martin.
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349857#349857
>
>
> >=======================
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [b]
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=349936#349936
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: Trial fitting cockpit module |
Thanks much for that detailed explanation. My cockpit module aligns
nearly perfect with the canoe without any cajoling. I could only
measure a 0.1-deg misalignment along the longitudinal axis, and that
is within the tolerance of my digital inclinometer. So I went ahead
and cleco'd the module to the firewall and canoe sides, then removed
it, and I am proceeding with populating the module.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Greg Fuchs <gregoryf.flyboy@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
>>What I often find confusing with the manual is that it says what to do, but
> it doesn't say why. As a scientist,
>> I hesitate to do something until I understand why.
>
> I am the same way, and predict many other builders out there are as well. It
> makes for a lot of thinking testing and preplanning before assembling. Many
> times one can create better ways (than what is in the manual) to put this
> thing together but it also eats up a lot of time. I find myself asking this
> question often when starting up a new task...Whats more important, precision
> or time? Most often, precision wins out. It is an airplane after all, and
> one can't expect to 'pull over' up there in the big blue skyways. Oh well,
> long precise build it is :) .
>
> When building the module up, one needs to check for clearances between the
> controls (plywood strengtheners, fuel lines, etc), and the bottom of the
> fuselage ..many times. The bearings (or the flange lips) for the control
> arms (or the lower side of the control arm bracket) can hit the bottom of
> the fuselage. The manual tells you to get them as low as possible ..but they
> can be too low. I also remember needing to grind the top layer glass and
> PVC away from the bottom of the fuse. (and re-glass to add the strength
> back) in the rear where the controls were binding, because they needed
> another 1/8" (or so) clearance (Bud has seen this too, apparently ..notice
> his reference to CS08). ...other things needed nips and tucks to get to fit
> properly. A builder could easily miss these small clearance issues if they
> are not careful, resulting in a lot of binding (and a bunch more unexpected
> work) once the module is sucked up to the fuse while clecoe-ing or strapping
> pre-gluing. During the process of populating the module with controls (and
> stuff), I found it convenient to finalize the position of the module at an
> early state. If that is not done, the module can slide around too much, and
> it just makes it difficult to know where to do the nips and tucks to get
> everything to work well together. I am sure you can wait until just before
> bonding the cockpit module to the fuse before drilling the placement holes,
> if you were very careful to realign it over and over again during the
> clearance checks. I opted for aligning it just once in the beginning. There
> are sure to be other methods, and possibly better ones out there....but this
> one worked well.
>
> The two holes were placed up front where the module would not deform over
> time. It is very strong up in the front around the tunnel area. The lower
> part of the tunnel was positively contacting the inside of the fuselage, so
> the small bolts went through the forward, lower flange of the module and
> through the firewall in that area. The top of the tunnel was not a good
> candidate for the bolts, because there was a slight clearance between the
> tunnel top and the firewall (other planes might be different?). Putting a
> positioning bolt there would cause instability and straining on the module
> and the firewall. Better to let the glue fill that in when the big day
> arrives.
>
> I hope that covered it a little better..
>
> Greg Fuchs
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Sarangan
> Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:32 PM
> To: europa-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: Trial fitting cockpit module
>
>
> I think my question may have been misunderstood. I realize the importance of
> CM alignment to the fuselage. My question is, isn't this alignment best done
> after the control tubes and fuel tank are installed rather than on an empty
> CM? I was thinking that some deformations to the CM may creep in during the
> work, so drilling the alignment holes through the firewall may be best done
> when the CM is nearly finished. Or, is the empty CM is significantly lighter
> and hence easier to align?
>
>
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: Trial fitting cockpit module |
Andrew,
You're right I now understand your question.
Proceeding with tank and controls in is fine, provided you do not build
a twist in when mounting the tank and controls.
Keeping two stands perfectly level while building it up is what we do.
They are just saw horses (trellis) that support the front and the tank
top module area. I don't seem to have a problem ever when installing
with tank and controls in.
No Reply Necessary
Bud
----- Original Message -----
From: Andrew Sarangan<mailto:asarangan@gmail.com>
To: europa-list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Trial fitting cockpit module
<asarangan@gmail.com<mailto:asarangan@gmail.com>>
Thanks much for that detailed explanation. My cockpit module aligns
nearly perfect with the canoe without any cajoling. I could only
measure a 0.1-deg misalignment along the longitudinal axis, and that
is within the tolerance of my digital inclinometer. So I went ahead
and cleco'd the module to the firewall and canoe sides, then removed
it, and I am proceeding with populating the module.
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Greg Fuchs
<gregoryf.flyboy@comcast.net<mailto:gregoryf.flyboy@comcast.net>> wrote:
<gregoryf.flyboy@comcast.net<mailto:gregoryf.flyboy@comcast.net>>
>
>
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
>>What I often find confusing with the manual is that it says what to
do, but
> it doesn't say why. As a scientist,
>> I hesitate to do something until I understand why.
>
> I am the same way, and predict many other builders out there are as
well. It
> makes for a lot of thinking testing and preplanning before
assembling. Many
> times one can create better ways (than what is in the manual) to put
this
> thing together but it also eats up a lot of time. I find myself
asking this
> question often when starting up a new task...Whats more important,
precision
> or time? Most often, precision wins out. It is an airplane after
all, and
> one can't expect to 'pull over' up there in the big blue skyways. Oh
well,
> long precise build it is :) .
>
> When building the module up, one needs to check for clearances
between the
> controls (plywood strengtheners, fuel lines, etc), and the bottom of
the
> fuselage ..many times. The bearings (or the flange lips) for the
control
> arms (or the lower side of the control arm bracket) can hit the
bottom of
> the fuselage. The manual tells you to get them as low as possible
..but they
> can be too low. I also remember needing to grind the top layer glass
and
> PVC away from the bottom of the fuse. (and re-glass to add the
strength
> back) in the rear where the controls were binding, because they
needed
> another 1/8" (or so) clearance (Bud has seen this too, apparently
..notice
> his reference to CS08). ...other things needed nips and tucks to get
to fit
> properly. A builder could easily miss these small clearance issues
if they
> are not careful, resulting in a lot of binding (and a bunch more
unexpected
> work) once the module is sucked up to the fuse while clecoe-ing or
strapping
> pre-gluing. During the process of populating the module with
controls (and
> stuff), I found it convenient to finalize the position of the module
at an
> early state. If that is not done, the module can slide around too
much, and
> it just makes it difficult to know where to do the nips and tucks to
get
> everything to work well together. I am sure you can wait until just
before
> bonding the cockpit module to the fuse before drilling the placement
holes,
> if you were very careful to realign it over and over again during
the
> clearance checks. I opted for aligning it just once in the
beginning. There
> are sure to be other methods, and possibly better ones out
there....but this
> one worked well.
>
> The two holes were placed up front where the module would not deform
over
> time. It is very strong up in the front around the tunnel area. The
lower
> part of the tunnel was positively contacting the inside of the
fuselage, so
> the small bolts went through the forward, lower flange of the module
and
> through the firewall in that area. The top of the tunnel was not a
good
> candidate for the bolts, because there was a slight clearance
between the
> tunnel top and the firewall (other planes might be different?).
Putting a
> positioning bolt there would cause instability and straining on the
module
> and the firewall. Better to let the glue fill that in when the big
day
> arrives.
>
> I hope that covered it a little better..
>
> Greg Fuchs
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com<mailto:owner-europa-list-server@ma
tronics.com>
> [mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Andrew
Sarangan
> Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:32 PM
> To: europa-list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: Trial fitting cockpit module
>
<asarangan@gmail.com<mailto:asarangan@gmail.com>>
>
> I think my question may have been misunderstood. I realize the
importance of
> CM alignment to the fuselage. My question is, isn't this alignment
best done
> after the control tubes and fuel tank are installed rather than on
an empty
> CM? I was thinking that some deformations to the CM may creep in
during the
> work, so drilling the alignment holes through the firewall may be
best done
> when the CM is nearly finished. Or, is the empty CM is significantly
lighter
> and hence easier to align?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List<http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Europa-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
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! --
|