X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imo-d23.mx.aol.com ([205.188.139.137] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.3) with ESMTP id 864766 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 05 Dec 2005 19:12:24 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.139.137; envelope-from=WRJJRS@aol.com Received: from WRJJRS@aol.com by imo-d23.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r6.3.) id q.1e8.47e0e1b2 (17228) for ; Mon, 5 Dec 2005 19:11:32 -0500 (EST) From: WRJJRS@aol.com Message-ID: <1e8.47e0e1b2.30c63134@aol.com> Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 19:11:32 EST Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: fuel/brake lines fittings To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1133827892" X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5044 X-Spam-Flag: NO -------------------------------1133827892 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/4/2005 7:01:34 PM Pacific Standard Time, eanderson@carolina.rr.com writes: >> No question you normally want to use fittings of matching metals. >> However, there has been some discussion about very small aluminum >> fittings (such as -3) not having much reserve strength (compared to >> larger aluminum fittings and of course steel fittings). >> For general info group, I have used the -3 aluminum fittings and found them more than strong enough. A getoff that broke the caliper on a guard rail didn't fail the fitting. While that isn't total surity it does show that the fittings are tough. I used the Earl's fittings then. I wouldn't hesitate to use them on the aircraft. Bill Jepson -------------------------------1133827892 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message dated 12/4/2005 7:01:34 PM Pacific Standard Time, eanderso= n@carolina.rr.com writes:
>> No question you normally want to use=20= fittings of matching metals.
>> However, there has been some discu= ssion about very small aluminum
>> fittings (such as -3) not havin= g much reserve strength (compared to
>> larger aluminum fittings a= nd of course steel fittings).
>>
For general info group, I have used the -3 aluminum fittings and found=20= them more than strong enough. A getoff that broke the caliper on a guard rai= l didn't fail the fitting. While that isn't total surity it does show that t= he fittings are tough. I used the Earl's fittings then. I wouldn't hesitate=20= to use them on the aircraft.
 
Bill Jepson
-------------------------------1133827892--