X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 19:03:45 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-d21.mx.aol.com ([205.188.144.207] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with ESMTP id 2465242 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 10 Nov 2007 13:17:27 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.144.207; envelope-from=CavittP@aol.com Received: from CavittP@aol.com by imo-d21.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.3.) id q.ce4.20d66d98 (48576); Sat, 10 Nov 2007 13:16:45 -0500 (EST) From: CavittP@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 13:16:45 EST Subject: Re: [LML] Permanant Header Tank X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net X-Original-CC: sbej@verizon.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1194718605" X-Mailer: AOL 9.0 VR sub 5006 X-Spam-Flag: NO -------------------------------1194718605 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit DON'T DO IT!!! If you glass in your header tank permanently, you'll not be able to access important stuff - such as engine mount nuts, rudder pedals/brakes, and whatever else you have installed in the area forward of the instrument panel. Good luck modifying and/or adding additional wiring. My 2-cents worth. Call if you have any questions. Pete Cavitt - N320PL 619-701-0784 Cell _cavittp@aol.com_ (mailto:cavittp@aol.com) Youtube.com: San Diego Lancair In a message dated 11/10/2007 8:50:24 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, sbej@verizon.net writes: Anyone have good reasoning as to why I shouldn't permanantly bond my header tank on? I tried the hinge method and the fit with the cowling was terrible so I had to take the entire thing apart today. Now Im thinking it may be a whole lot easier to install and finish by bonding the tank on for good. My brake systems are all easily accesible even with it on. I cant think of any reason I would ever remove it after the thing is flying. Anybody have a good argument against this? Thanks. ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com -------------------------------1194718605 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
DON'T DO IT!!!
 
If you glass in your header tank permanently, you'll not be able to acc= ess=20 important stuff - such as engine mount nuts, rudder pedals/brakes, and whate= ver=20 else you have installed in the area forward of the instrument panel.  G= ood=20 luck modifying and/or adding additional wiring.
 
My 2-cents worth.
 
Call if you have any questions.
 
Pete Cavitt - N320PL
619-701-0784 Cell
 
Youtube.com:  San Diego Lancair
 
 
 
In a message dated 11/10/2007 8:50:24 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,=20 sbej@verizon.net writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>
Anyone have good reasoning as to why I sh= ouldn't=20 permanantly bond my header tank on?  I tried the hinge method and the= fit=20 with the cowling was terrible so I had to take the entire thing apart toda= y.=20 Now Im thinking it may be a whole lot easier to install and finish by bond= ing=20 the tank on for good.  My brake systems are all easily=20 accesible even with it on. I cant think of any reason I would ever re= move=20 it after the thing is flying. Anybody have a good argument against=20 this?
 
Thanks. 
 



See what's new= at AOL.com an= d Make AOL Your Homepage.
-------------------------------1194718605--