X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:40:30 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mtao02.charter.net ([209.225.8.187] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with ESMTP id 2556593 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 04 Dec 2007 21:52:08 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.225.8.187; envelope-from=troneill@charter.net Received: from aarprv04.charter.net ([10.20.200.74]) by mtao02.charter.net (InterMail vM.7.08.03.00 201-2186-126-20070710) with ESMTP id <20071205025124.BFKM27011.mtao02.charter.net@aarprv04.charter.net> for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 21:51:24 -0500 Received: from axs ([75.132.198.100]) by aarprv04.charter.net with SMTP id <20071205025124.IKBE17353.aarprv04.charter.net@axs> for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2007 21:51:24 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <00d401c836e9$b9ba8df0$6401a8c0@axs> From: "terrence o'neill" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: limit Gs for 235 (kit #11) X-Original-Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 20:51:24 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00D1_01C836B7.6EE781C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Chzlrs: 0 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00D1_01C836B7.6EE781C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ah, more good info. Thaks, Gary. Terrence o'Neill 235/320 N211Al ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Gary Edwards=20 To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 05:24 PM Subject: [LML] Re: limit Gs for 235 (kit #11) 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_00D1_01C836B7.6EE781C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ah, more good info.  = Thaks,=20 Gary.
Terrence = o'Neill
235/320
N211Al
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Gary=20 Edwards
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, = 2007 05:24=20 PM
Subject: [LML] Re: limit Gs for = 235 (kit=20 #11)

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=20 attain sufficient fuel quantity of 11 gallons per wing.  I=20 speculate, a big percentage of the 235's built utilized the optional = wing tank=20 location.  Sealing the leading edge tank arrangement while=20 installing the one piece leading edge wrap around wing skin=20 attachment to the wing spar was not an 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 = capacity.
 
2.  The ailerons of the 235 and 320/360 are nearly the = same. =20 The pushrod attachment is at the inboard end, same as the 320/360=20 arrangement.  The 235 rod to aileron attachment utilized one=20 "L" bracket, whereas the 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=20 the 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=20 235 internals than I could give you.  For example, Tim = Jorgensen's=20 commentary on the wing test data.
 
The 320/360 aileron push rod is at the inboard edge of the = aileron=20 while the 235 might have that placed further outboard.  = That would=20 allow for a bigger wing fuel capacity.  I only get 17 gallons = in each=20 wing up to the rib that is positioned at the inboard edge of the=20 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=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 = rib/top-skin joints.  Of course, BID could have been added thru = the=20 push 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=20 rib/skin joints.
 
Scott



Check out AOL Money & Finance's list of the hottest products and top money wasters of=20 2007.
------=_NextPart_000_00D1_01C836B7.6EE781C0--