X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 18:24:14 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from bay0-omc2-s32.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.168] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with ESMTP id 2555440 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 10:51:32 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.54.246.168; envelope-from=gary21sn@hotmail.com Received: from hotmail.com ([65.54.250.88]) by bay0-omc2-s32.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 4 Dec 2007 07:50:54 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 07:50:53 -0800 X-Original-Message-ID: Received: from 67.42.179.140 by BAY115-DAV16.phx.gbl with DAV; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 15:50:51 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [67.42.179.140] X-Originating-Email: [gary21sn@hotmail.com] X-Sender: gary21sn@hotmail.com From: "Gary Edwards" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: limit Gs for 235 (kit #11) X-Original-Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 07:52:51 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_088B_01C8364A.ABE090C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: MSN 9 X-MimeOLE: Produced By MSN MimeOLE V9.50.0039.1900 Seal-Send-Time: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 07:52:51 -0800 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Dec 2007 15:50:53.0863 (UTC) FILETIME=[73A65B70:01C8368D] X-Original-Return-Path: gary21sn@hotmail.com This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_088B_01C8364A.ABE090C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 1. The original 235 plans were for the wing tanks to be forward of the = wing spar in the forward "D" section and included an area in the most = outboard wing section rear of the wing spar (the fuel cap is out there). = A later option was presented for wing tank location, which located the = wing tanks in the first bay outboard of BL 50 ("center wing tank"). In = doing so, the next rib was to be moved in order to attain sufficient = fuel quantity of 11 gallons per wing. I speculate, a big percentage of = the 235's built utilized the optional wing tank location. Sealing the = leading edge tank arrangement while installing the one piece leading = edge wrap around wing skin attachment to the wing spar was not an easy = task. Also, some 235 builders continued the "center wing tank" location = farther outboard for more capacity (way over factory gross when full). = Subsequently, the 320/360 airframe design utilized the outboard of BL 50 = wing tank location and extended it outboard for more capacity. 2. The ailerons of the 235 and 320/360 are nearly the same. The = pushrod attachment is at the inboard end, same as the 320/360 = arrangement. The 235 rod to aileron attachment utilized one "L" = bracket, whereas the 320/360 utilized two for more attachment support. Gary Edwards LNC2 Medford, Oregon =20 =20 Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 4:23 AM In a message dated 12/3/2007 1:28:36 P.M. Central Standard Time, = troneill@charter.net writes: When going through the outer wings vs the builders' book I noted = many differences in the use of areas for fuel. The book showed fuel = ahead of the spar, and in the outer bay past the aileron bellcrank the = book showed fuel between main and rear spars out to the tip. But in the = wing itself the fuel area stopped at the aileron bellcrank rib... and = each wing tank was marked as about 18 gal. per side. Also, the wing has = the aileron bellcrank outboard of the mounting rib vs inboard in the = book.=20 Is there still a way to check carbon sparcap thickness, and whether = there are cap strips on the ribs? ... probably too late to check, as the = wings are on now. Terry, You are getting much better information from those more familiar with = 235 internals than I could give you. For example, Tim Jorgensen's = commentary on the wing test data. The 320/360 aileron push rod is at the inboard edge of the aileron = while the 235 might have that placed further outboard. That would allow = for a bigger wing fuel capacity. I only get 17 gallons in each wing up = to the rib that is positioned at the inboard edge of the aileron. BTW, = the book may have an error (gee, like that never happened before). When the ribs were installed into the wing's top skin, two BID was = laid up on each side of the rib. You should be able to see this on the = top skin when you look into the aileron push rod access door. If the = cap strip technique was used, then the bottom skin would have pre built = flanges bonded to the bottom skin and its appearance would be similar to = the rib/top-skin joints. Of course, BID could have been added thru the = push rod access door so you may have to look into the wing fuel tanks = with a lighted mirror to compare the visual appearance of the top and = bottom rib/skin joints. Scott -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Check out AOL Money & Finance's list of the hottest = products and top money = wasters of 2007. ------=_NextPart_000_088B_01C8364A.ABE090C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
1.  The original 235 plans were for the wing tanks to be = forward of=20 the wing spar in the forward "D" section and included an area in the = most=20 outboard wing section rear of the wing spar (the fuel cap is out=20 there).  A later option was presented for wing tank location, = which=20 located the wing tanks in the first bay outboard of BL 50 ("center wing=20 tank").  In doing so, the next rib was to be moved in order to = attain=20 sufficient fuel quantity of 11 gallons per wing.  I speculate, = a big=20 percentage of the 235's built utilized the optional wing tank = location. =20 Sealing the leading edge tank arrangement while = installing the one=20 piece leading edge wrap around wing skin attachment to the wing spar was = not an=20 easy task.
 
Also, some 235 builders continued the "center wing tank"=20 location farther outboard for more capacity (way over factory gross = when=20 full).  Subsequently, the 320/360 airframe design = utilized the=20 outboard of BL 50 wing tank location and extended it outboard for more=20 capacity.
 
2.  The ailerons of the 235 and 320/360 are nearly the = same.  The=20 pushrod attachment is at the inboard end, same as the 320/360 = arrangement. =20 The 235 rod to aileron attachment utilized one "L" bracket, whereas = the=20 320/360 utilized two for more attachment support.
 
Gary Edwards
LNC2
Medford, Oregon  
 
  
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, = 2007 4:23=20 AM

In a message dated 12/3/2007 1:28:36 P.M. Central Standard Time, = troneill@charter.net = writes:
When going = through the=20 outer wings vs the builders' book I noted many differences in the = use of=20 areas for fuel.  The book showed fuel ahead of the spar, = and in=20 the outer bay past the aileron bellcrank the book showed fuel = between main=20 and rear spars out to the tip.  But in the wing = itself the =20 fuel area stopped at the aileron bellcrank rib... and each wing tank = was=20 marked as about 18 gal. per side. Also, the wing has the = aileron=20 bellcrank outboard of the mounting rib vs inboard in the=20 book. 
Is there = still a way to=20 check carbon sparcap thickness, and whether there are cap = strips on the=20 ribs? ... probably too late to check, as the wings are on=20 now.
Terry,
 
You are getting much better information from those more familiar = with 235=20 internals than I could give you.  For example, Tim Jorgensen's = commentary=20 on the wing test data.
 
The 320/360 aileron push rod is at the inboard edge of the = aileron while=20 the 235 might have that placed further outboard.  That would = allow=20 for a bigger wing fuel capacity.  I only get 17 gallons in each = wing up=20 to the rib that is positioned at the inboard edge of the = aileron.  BTW,=20 the book may have an error (gee, like that never happened = before).
 
When the ribs were installed into the wing's top skin, two BID = was laid=20 up on each side of the rib.  You should be able to see this on = the top=20 skin when you look into the aileron push rod access door.  If the = cap=20 strip technique was used, then the bottom skin would have pre built = flanges=20 bonded to the bottom skin and its appearance would be similar to the=20 rib/top-skin joints.  Of course, BID could have been added thru = the push=20 rod access door so you may have to look into the wing fuel tanks with = a=20 lighted mirror to compare the visual appearance of the top and bottom = rib/skin=20 joints.
 
Scott



Check out AOL Money & Finance's list of the hottest products and top money wasters of=20 2007.
------=_NextPart_000_088B_01C8364A.ABE090C0--