Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 18:38:03 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mx2.webound.com ([216.90.136.4] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0) with ESMTP-TLS id 1849713 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 31 Oct 2002 17:12:07 -0500 Received: from shannon (sl-instave-1-0.sprintlink.net [144.232.239.138]) by mx2.webound.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g9VMBv356947 for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2002 16:11:58 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from kycshann@kyol.net) Reply-To: From: "Shannon Knoepflein" X-Original-To: "'Lancair Mailing List'" Subject: RE: [LML] Re: Legacy Canopy Locking Solution X-Original-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 17:10:44 -0500 Organization: ISC X-Original-Message-ID: <00bd01c2812a$5d023330$1805000a@shannon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal I had already considered that. And, actually, that's the type of actuator it is. For people that don't want the self locking feature, just remove the spring in the little latch and it won't self lock. The more I think about it, that might be the way mine ends up too...just seems safer, especially after the thoughts Ron had earlier. All that has to be done is remove the spring in the latch, the actuator is already dual action. Done, I'll do it that way. Thanks. --- Shannon Knoepflein <---> kycshann@kyol.net Shannon, Have you considered a bi-directional actuator like the ones typically used on car door locks /security systems? I was thinking I might try that. Push