Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:14 AM - Re: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? (rparigoris)
2. 02:26 AM - Re: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length (GRAHAM SINGLETON)
3. 02:32 AM - Re: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? (GRAHAM SINGLETON)
4. 03:32 AM - Re: AW: G Load testing (John Wighton)
5. 03:49 AM - Re: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? (craig)
6. 07:57 AM - Re: Re: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? (Fred Klein)
7. 08:51 AM - Re: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? (rparigoris)
8. 08:53 AM - Re: Re: AW: G Load testing (William Daniell)
9. 09:03 AM - Re: Re: AW: G Load testing (Karl Heindl)
10. 12:43 PM - Re: Re: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? (Fred Klein)
11. 01:03 PM - Re: Re: AW: G Load testing (Paul McAllister)
12. 03:00 PM - Re: Old Classic needs upgrade to 912S 100hp (jonathanmilbank)
13. 03:37 PM - Outrigger Wheel Fork (Dave Moore)
14. 05:11 PM - Re: Re: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? (Kingsley Hurst)
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: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? |
Hi Fred
Thx. for the reply. I think I did a poor job of conveying my idea of Bondoing in
place a positioning point.
In other words what I want to do is bond the FL18P + S to a piece of wood like
you did.
Then I want to get FL18P + S in perfect alignment with the inboard flap hinges
W19s, checking to make sure they are positioned correctly left and right.
I think we are in agreement here.
Now I'm having a hard time figuring out how I can remove the FL18P + S that are
stuck to the piece of wood and get it back to this perfect registration after
gooped up with Redux/flox.
What I'm proposing is when everything is in perfect alignment, sneak the FL16s
in place, being careful to not change the perfect registration, and bolt the
FL18s to the FL16s, then Bondo the FL16s to the fuse. Now I have the pivot holes
of the FL16s in the perfect position too.
I can then remove the FL18s that are bonded to the piece of wood, goop them up
with Redux /flox, then when I set in place, I will again insert the bolts between
the FL18s and FL16s and I should have the FL18s in perfect position for the
cure?
I'm just proposing to use the pivot hole of the FL16s Bondoed to the fuse as a
positioning jig. I could do the same thing by bonding in a piece of metal or
wood, it just that the FL16s happen to have the correct size hole in them already
and happen to be close at hand. Putting 3M packaging tape on the surface of
FL16s and scuffing the tape makes for a surface that sticks good enough and
makes for EZ clean up.
If you completly understood my proposal and just plain think it's a bad idea, how
did you make sure your FL18s were in perfect alignment after you gooped them
up with Redux/flox?
My baggage bay is not yet installed, my build partner Wayne is slight, so he is
going to get most of the in the back work to do!
Ron Parigoris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405549#405549
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: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length |
Tony=0Adon't use 30 degree flap, Europa tested it and found you are startin
g to lose aileron control at the low speeds achieved in ground effect.=0AGr
aham=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: Tony Renshaw <tonyrensh
aw268@gmail.com>=0ATo: "europa-list@matronics.com" <europa-list@matronics.c
om> =0ASent: Monday, 29 July 2013, 1:11=0ASubject: Europa-List: Tri-gear Fl
Renshaw <tonyrenshaw268@gmail.com>=0A=0AGidday,=0ABuilding a taildragger ve
rsion I am not constrained by gear/flap geometry to determine the flap I ca
n deploy, since they will be electric. I feel I recall the tricycle underca
rriage versions can deploy 30 degrees of flap and I was wondering if someon
e with that amount could measure the length of their slots as a guide whils
t I remove the fuse material. I don't have the cross tube connected to the
flap motor as yet, and am doing it by sanding the slots incrementally as I
lower the flaps, as I didn't trust myself with the jig I made up. (I'm gett
ing tired of fixing my mistakes). =0AThanks in advance.=0ARegards=0ATony Re
======================
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: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? |
Fred=0Aagree with you.=0AGraham=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A
From: Fred Klein <fklein@orcasonline.com>=0ATo: europa-list@matronics.com
=0ASent: Monday, 29 July 2013, 6:39=0ASubject: Re: Europa-List: Is bonding
FL16 to fuse a bad idea?=0A =0A=0A=0ARon...see indented comments...Fred=0A
=0A=0AOn Jul 28, 2013, at 8:51 PM, rparigoris wrote:=0A=0AI'm thinking pret
ty hard I want to bond both of my FL16s to my fuse with Bondo. The FL16s ar
e the hinge arms that get mounted to the flap cross tube with two fasteners
.=0A>=0AAfter looking at the build manual and my own photos taken during co
nstruction, it's my opinion that bonding the FL16s to the fuselage w/ bondo
is not a good idea...I believe the key for this step is to ensure that the
bolt holes in the FL18s are perfectly aligned w/ those in the W19s...if yo
u want to trial fit the FL16s, do so as long as you can ensure the FL18s ar
e shimmed in perfect alignment and don't move...once the FL18s are reduxed
in place and bolted thru the fuse and you've dispensed w/ the alignment str
ing, bolting the FL16s to the FL18s is straightforward.-=0A=0A=0A>You see
if these FL16s are temporarily bonded in position, once my FL18P + S are t
emporarily bonded to a piece of wood, then I goop them up with Redux/flox,
set into position and I can insert actual pivot hardware between FL18P+ S a
nd FL16s to make sure pivot hole alignment is perfect with inboard W19 flap
hinges.=0A>=0A=0AMaybe I'm missing something, but this sounds -backwards
...the FL18s should determine the location of the hinge point w/ the FL16s.
..not the other way around.=0A=0A>Question:=0A>Is a bad idea? =0AI think so
=0A=0A=0AOr is there an easier way?=0A>=0AFollow the manual and align the F
L18s as shown in my pixs...but when I say "follow the manual", I certainly
do NOT recommend following the SEQUENCE of operations shown in the manual;
namely, to do this whole flap installation AFTER the top is bonded on...I u
nderstand that you HAVE already bonded on your top and...for the life of me
...I simply cannot imagine having to deal with what you're facing...You hav
e my most sincere condolences...though I presume that you have yet to insta
ll the baggage bay rear bulkhead...I give a hearty salute to anyone who has
managed to install the flap mechanism AFTER the top has been bonded on the
bottom fuselage.=0A=0AI did my damnedest to do absolutely EVERYTHING I cou
ld possibly do in the tailcone BEFORE bonding on the top and bonding in the
...of course I used many many clecoes to ensure that trial fitting of the
top was skookum (in perfect alignment).=0A=0A=0AI just turned two aluminium
bushings that center sewing thread in the .1875 ' diameter holes of W19s.
Using a mini center drill and a finer pressure only drill chuck, drilling t
he .0145" holes was a piece of cake.=0A>=0A=0AYou be the Zen master Ron...w
ith what you're facing, being a yoga master wouldn't hurt either,=0A=0A=0AF
===============
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: AW: G Load testing |
Craig,
Yes 1.5 special factor. Mitigation of this can be justified by performing hot
wet tests which typically result in lower factors. But can quickly escalate into
difficult discussion unless correct testing methods, batch numbers and such
like are adopted.
There are databases of data available for composites (NCAMP) for example which
can also be used to justify reduced factors. Not sure if the composites system
that Europa use is in there.
For Certification purposes we cover a temperature range -55 to +80 (typ).
Regards
John
--------
John Wighton
Europa XS trigear G-IPOD
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405552#405552
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 |
|
Subject: | Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? |
I know the manual says string line through the hole centres,
But to me this was too open to visual error,I used a thin rope that was a
neat fit
But not tight so it could run freely through the holes, threaded it through
All four holes then hung a tin of ampreg on each end of the rope, this
pulled
Two centre holes into line with the outer two holes, did a dry run to see
how much
Flox bed was required, did the flox bed and put it all back as described and
it worked
Well, at final assembly it all aligned perfectly.
That's my 2 cents worth, maybe you can gleen something of use out of it
Regards
craig
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: | Re: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? |
Ron...see indented comments below...Fred
On Jul 29, 2013, at 12:14 AM, rparigoris wrote:
> Now I'm having a hard time figuring out how I can remove the FL18P + S
that are stuck to the piece of wood and get it back to this perfect
registration after gooped up with Redux/flox.
I used either a dab of bondo or some hot glue to bond
the FL18s to the piece of wood...a light tap on a chisel separated them
in a jif.
>
> What I'm proposing is when everything is in perfect alignment, sneak
the FL16s in place, being careful to not change the perfect
registration, and bolt the FL18s to the FL16s, then Bondo the FL16s to
the fuse. Now I have the pivot holes of the FL16s in the perfect
position too.
>
> I can then remove the FL18s that are bonded to the piece of wood, goop
them up with Redux /flox, then when I set in place, I will again insert
the bolts between the FL18s and FL16s and I should have the FL18s in
perfect position for the cure?
I believe using the string...especially w/ your clever
centering machinement...is a more accurate way to ensure alignment than
to rely upon the bolts...but use your own judgement.
In my case, I did NOT remove the FL18s from the piece of
wood until AFTER they were reduxed and cured in final position.
Good luck,
Fred
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: | Re: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? |
Craig, Thx. for the reply.
Fred, I'm still unclear on how you reproduced the alignment for the cure once you
gooped things up and set into position.
I think you had the wood bonded to the aluminium beforehand. Then I think you gooped
up the bonding surface with Redux/flox and set into position. From your
last reply, perhaps then you strung the string, with things gooped up, got things
centered on the string, then put Bondo on the wood to fuse to hold in place
for cure? Perhaps Redux/flox was thick enough you just aligned and let it cure
on its own?
Ron Parigoris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405571#405571
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: AW: G Load testing |
What does the forum think of the value of this exercise?
Will
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of UVTREITH
Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2013 06:34
Subject: AW: Europa-List: Re: AW: G Load testing
Hi Paul,
Here are some pictures.
02+04 is preparation with a soft foam blanket on which we also marked the
position of the concrete bags, each 25 kg. 07 shows the support winches,
which you can release very slowly and jumpless
15 shows the measurement after each load increase, 16+17 the full load of
each side and 21 the full load spread.
Each side 1035 kg concrete bags, therefore 2.070 kg in total. To this you
have to add the wing weight of 94-100 kg complete, depends on build.
The winches were released free (you can see it on the loose foam supports).
One problem was that the support timber sticks were too short, so that we
had to do some work on the wing surface later.
A similar test was also done with the tail plane 100 to 150 kg and opposite
(pictures 9839, 9842 and 9845
With picture 9854 you can see, that this load test on a classic one failed.
The fuselage/cockpit was not correct made and the fuse started to bulk out.
This was later repaired and than ok.
This is the wing load test, approved by the OUV and LBA here in Germany
Bruno
_____
Von: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] Im Auftrag von Paul
McAllister
Gesendet: Samstag, 27. Juli 2013 17:34
An: europa-list@matronics.com
Betreff: Re: Europa-List: Re: AW: G Load testing
Does anyone have any photos that show the entire wing under load where I can
see the deflection?
On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 6:24 AM, gtagr <clive.maf@googlemail.com> wrote:
Bruno,
Thanks for your post -we can trust a German to provide some excellent
detail! That photo gives me great confidence in the design - they are bags
of cement?
Clive :D
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405403#405403
==========
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List
==========
http://forums.matronics.com
==========
le, List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: | Re: AW: G Load testing |
Will wrote:
What does the forum think of the value of this exercise? I don't know what
to think and am totally confused. The required weights quoted per wing seem
to range from 1000 to 2700 kilos. So was the original load test inadequate
?
Karl From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-europa-list
-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of UVTREITH
Sent: Sunday=2C July 28=2C 2013 06:34
Subject: AW: Europa-List: Re: AW: G Load testing Hi Paul=2C Here are some p
ictures.02+04 is preparation with a soft foam blanket on which we also mark
ed the position of the concrete bags=2C each 25 kg. 07 shows the support wi
nches=2C which you can release very slowly and jumpless15 shows the measure
ment after each load increase=2C 16+17 the full load of each side and 21 th
e full load spread. Each side 1035 kg concrete bags=2C therefore 2.070 kg i
n total. To this you have to add the wing weight of 94-100 kg complete=2C d
epends on build. The winches were released free (you can see it on the loos
e foam supports). One problem was that the support timber sticks were too s
hort=2C so that we had to do some work on the wing surface later.A similar
test was also done with the tail plane 100 to 150 kg and opposite (pictures
9839=2C 9842 and 9845With picture 9854 you can see=2C that this load test
on a classic one failed. The fuselage/cockpit was not correct made and the
fuse started to bulk out. This was later repaired and than ok. This is the
wing load test=2C approved by the OUV and LBA here in Germany Bruno Von:
owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-europa-list-server@ma
tronics.com] Im Auftrag von Paul McAllister
Gesendet: Samstag=2C 27. Juli 2013 17:34
An: europa-list@matronics.com
Betreff: Re: Europa-List: Re: AW: G Load testing Does anyone have any photo
s that show the entire wing under load where I can see the deflection? On S
at=2C Jul 27=2C 2013 at 6:24 AM=2C gtagr <clive.maf@googlemail.com> wrote:-
Bruno=2C
Thanks for your post -we can trust a German to provide some excellent detai
l! That photo gives me great confidence in the design - they are bags of c
ement?
Clive :D
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405403#405403
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List
http://forums.matronics.com
le=2C List Admin.
="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List http://forums.matronics.c
om http://www.matronics.com/contribution =0A
=0A
=0A
=0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
============0A
=0A
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? |
Ron...sorry for the confusion...what's missing from my photo sequence is a shot
showing the FL18 (still temp. glued to the wood) set in the bed of Redux/flox.
The "goop" was quite stiff. I did NOT bondo the wood to the fuse bottom. After
placing the FL18s in the goop, I ran the string, tapped the wood/FL18 assembly
into alignment, and let it cure...Bob's your Uncle...Fred
On Jul 29, 2013, at 8:50 AM, rparigoris wrote:
>
> Craig, Thx. for the reply.
>
> Fred, I'm still unclear on how you reproduced the alignment for the cure once
you gooped things up and set into position.
>
> I think you had the wood bonded to the aluminium beforehand. Then I think you
gooped up the bonding surface with Redux/flox and set into position. From your
last reply, perhaps then you strung the string, with things gooped up, got things
centered on the string, then put Bondo on the wood to fuse to hold in place
for cure? Perhaps Redux/flox was thick enough you just aligned and let it
cure on its own?
>
> Ron Parigoris
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405571#405571
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: AW: G Load testing |
Hi Bruno, thanks very much for the photos and documents. - Regards, Paul
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 6:33 AM, UVTREITH <uvtreith@t-online.de> wrote:
> ** **
>
> Hi Paul,****
>
> ** **
>
> Here are some pictures.****
>
> 02+04 is preparation with a soft foam blanket on which we also marked the
> position of the concrete bags, each 25 kg. 07 shows the support winches,
> which you can release very slowly and jumpless****
>
> 15 shows the measurement after each load increase, 16+17 the full load of
> each side and 21 the full load spread. ****
>
> Each side 1035 kg concrete bags, therefore 2.070 kg in total. To this you
> have to add the wing weight of 94-100 kg complete, depends on build. ****
>
> The winches were released free (you can see it on the loose foam
> supports). One problem was that the support timber sticks were too short,
> so that we had to do some work on the wing surface later.****
>
> A similar test was also done with the tail plane 100 to 150 kg and
> opposite (pictures 9839, 9842 and 9845****
>
> With picture 9854 you can see, that this load test on a classic one
> failed. The fuselage/cockpit was not correct made and the fuse started to
> bulk out. This was later repaired and than ok. ****
>
> This is the wing load test, approved by the OUV and LBA here in ****
> Germany********
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Bruno****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
> ------------------------------
>
> *Von:* owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] *Im Auftrag von *Paul McAllister
> *Gesendet:* Samstag, 27. Juli 2013 17:34
> *An:* europa-list@matronics.com
> *Betreff:* Re: Europa-List: Re: AW: G Load testing****
>
> ** **
>
> Does anyone have any photos that show the entire wing under load where I
> can see the deflection?****
>
> ** **
>
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 6:24 AM, gtagr <clive.maf@googlemail.com> wrote:**
> **
>
>
> Bruno,
> Thanks for your post -we can trust a German to provide some excellent
> detail! That photo gives me great confidence in the design - they are bags
> of cement?
> Clive :D
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405403#405403
>
>
> ==========
> target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List
> ==========
> http://forums.matronics.com
> ==========
> le, List Admin.
> ="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==========
>
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List*
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *http://forums.matronics.com*
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
>
> * *
>
>
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: Old Classic needs upgrade to 912S 100hp |
Thanks Dave and I'll take your good advice. When I do the preflight oil tank gurgling
on my 80hp engine and then do it on a friend's 100hp 912S,
the difference in compression is very noticeable. Hence my concern about whether
the older starter motors can cope.
Anyway I've now purchased my 2nd hand replacement engine from Kevin Dilks, sight
unseen. Why do I have the confidence to do this? Well, his reputation goes before
him for restoring Rotax engines to near-mint condition and another friend
has found him to give excellent advice on problems, free of charge and his suggestions
work.
Also he was described to me as "a good chap" by no less than Neville Eyre. Recommendations
don't come higher than that!
Furthermore he's selling me a 230 hour engine which has been opened, checked carefully
and every conceivable part that needed replacing was done with new components.
I'm assured that when he says he's done that, you can bet your bottom
dollar that he has.
Finally my experience with Rotax 4-strokes tells me that provided they're serviced
and operated properly, you can place great faith in them.
I have no qualms and will be collecting the 100 horses on Wednesday.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405615#405615
Message 13
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: | Outrigger Wheel Fork |
Hello Folks,
Does anyone (in the UK) have a spare outrigger wheel fork that they would be
willing to part with, for a modest consideration..?
I suspect that Trigear conversions should mean that there are a good few
spare ones scattered around the Europa community.
I guess it's only fair to say why I'm seeking a replacement - not that you
couldn't guess..! I managed to grind the wheel fork sleeve down to a knife
edge by a reasonably dramatic swerve, landing on a wide tarmac runway.
Ground loop..? No, no, no. Well, Yes.!
Fortunately, I did not hit anything or break anything else - bar grind the
nylon leg as well, I've procured a replacement via the Factory.
Yes, I've undergone tailwheel conversion training, LAA coaching on the Mono
and had my hand held a lot by some experienced monowheel Europa-ists. But,
I am still a Mono novice and I was exceedingly rusty, and I should have got
myself current again on a grass strip, and I should have controlled my speed
better, and I should have flared more and held off longer, and landed with
no yaw, and been more aware of the (light) cross wind, and gone around when
I bounced.
And, I am going to persevere with the Mono configuration. (For the moment,
anyway..!!)
Yours soberly,
Dave
Dave Moore
Mono G-FITY
Email: mooredca@tiscali.co.uk
Home Tel: 01224 572041
Mobile: +44 (0)777 555 3772
Message 14
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: Is bonding FL16 to fuse a bad idea? |
Ron,
This suggestion may help you with your perceived problem.
Drill a 3/32" or 7/64" hole right through an AN3 bolt and use this bolt to
temporarily assemble a FL16 / FL18 combination. The string line (fishing
line in my case) can now be run through the hollow bolt and the FL16 can be
clamped to the lugs on the cross tube for alignment of the hinge point. It
made my life a lot easier at the time!
Cheers
Kingsley in Oz
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! --
|