TeamGrumman-List Digest Archive

Sun 03/27/11


Total Messages Posted: 2



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 08:41 AM - Re: elevator trim arms (flyv35b)
     2. 11:58 AM - Re: elevator trim arms (Gary Vogt)
 
 
 


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
    Time: 08:41:40 AM PST US
    From: flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
    Subject: Re: elevator trim arms
    Gary's talking about the 3 rivet holes. I don't know what the drawing spec for the holes is but .143" would be the size for an oversize #4 Cherry-Max rivet. Many times when a .125" hole is used initially and a CM rivet is removed the hole gets elongated or over-sized if you are not really careful. That is the reason for the oversize CM rivet as the hole can be re-sized and a tight fitting rivet installed. I agree that it would probably be better to have the holes in the replacement arms drilled for the oversize rivets, but maybe Fletchair is just following the original drawing specs (your comment Garner). Who knows why the angle variation. May be due to spring back of the metal when it was bent or some other reason. That shouldn't be hard to deal with. Cliff On 3/26/2011 8:50 PM, Gary Vogt wrote: > Installed a set of elevator trim arms yesterday. > > Don't know if ya'all recall me saying something before. So, here I am > ag'in. > > The trim arms, to begin with, need to have .143 inch holes in them > instead of the .125 holes. All of the early Grummans (Pre-2004) have the > larger holes. Not a big deal, really. Except that the material is really > hard and it chews up drill bits. > > Second, the angles are not quite the same as the early ones. This puts > the arm on a different plane (geometric plane) than the original ones. > Plus, the portion with the rivet holes is a bit too long and it hits the > pivot tab. The tab needs to be trimmed down to keep the arm from hitting it. > > Pics included. >


    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
    Time: 11:58:35 AM PST US
    From: Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@yahoo.com>
    Subject: Re: elevator trim arms
    I'm not sure why the holes are the oversize holes. All I know is that ALL of the ones I've replaced already had the larger holes. It isn't just the bend angle. The lengths to the bends are wrong also. They don't have the same Form, Fit, and Function as the original arms. ________________________________ From: flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com> Sent: Sun, March 27, 2011 8:18:29 AM Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: elevator trim arms Gary's talking about the 3 rivet holes. I don't know what the drawing spec for the holes is but .143" would be the size for an oversize #4 Cherry-Max rivet. Many times when a .125" hole is used initially and a CM rivet is removed the hole gets elongated or over-sized if you are not really careful. That is the reason for the oversize CM rivet as the hole can be re-sized and a tight fitting rivet installed. I agree that it would probably be better to have the holes in the replacement arms drilled for the oversize rivets, but maybe Fletchair is just following the original drawing specs (your comment Garner). Who knows why the angle variation. May be due to spring back of the metal when it was bent or some other reason. That shouldn't be hard to deal with. Cliff On 3/26/2011 8:50 PM, Gary Vogt wrote: > Installed a set of elevator trim arms yesterday. > > Don't know if ya'all recall me saying something before. So, here I am > ag'in. > > The trim arms, to begin with, need to have .143 inch holes in them > instead of the .125 holes. All of the early Grummans (Pre-2004) have the > larger holes. Not a big deal, really. Except that the material is really > hard and it chews up drill bits. > > Second, the angles are not quite the same as the early ones. This puts > the arm on a different plane (geometric plane) than the original ones. > Plus, the portion with the rivet holes is a bit too long and it hits the > pivot tab. The tab needs to be trimmed down to keep the arm from hitting it. > > Pics included. >




    Other Matronics Email List Services

  • Post A New Message
  •   teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
  • UN/SUBSCRIBE
  •   http://www.matronics.com/subscription
  • List FAQ
  •   http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/TeamGrumman-List.htm
  • Web Forum Interface To Lists
  •   http://forums.matronics.com
  • Matronics List Wiki
  •   http://wiki.matronics.com
  • 7-Day List Browse
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse/teamgrumman-list
  • Browse TeamGrumman-List Digests
  •   http://www.matronics.com/digest/teamgrumman-list
  • Browse Other Lists
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse
  • Live Online Chat!
  •   http://www.matronics.com/chat
  • Archive Downloading
  •   http://www.matronics.com/archives
  • Photo Share
  •   http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
  • Other Email Lists
  •   http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
  • Contributions
  •   http://www.matronics.com/contribution

    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! --