X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 17:34:57 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-m27.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.8] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c4) with ESMTP id 2691814 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:34:03 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.137.8; envelope-from=RWolf99@aol.com Received: from RWolf99@aol.com by imo-m27.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.3.) id q.d5c.1a056d67 (37544) for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:33:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from webmail-md20 (webmail-md20.webmail.aol.com [64.12.170.138]) by cia-mb02.mx.aol.com (v121.4) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMB025-92a84798cbdf18d; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:33:19 -0500 X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: Wing Gap 320 X-Original-Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:33:20 -0500 X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-AOL-IP: 72.19.171.41 X-MB-Message-Type: User MIME-Version: 1.0 From: rwolf99@aol.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CA2CC6589B1F08_810_1F5_webmail-md20.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 34032-STANDARD Received: from 72.19.171.41 by webmail-md20.sysops.aol.com (64.12.170.138) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:33:20 -0500 X-Original-Message-Id: <8CA2CC6589B1F08-810-F3@webmail-md20.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag: NO ----------MB_8CA2CC6589B1F08_810_1F5_webmail-md20.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Jim - The ones I've seen at fly-ins don't seem to have gaps as large as 1/8 inch.? Maybe half that.? I'd say keep it as small as you can while keeping the gap even (at least on the top, where people see it). You could run a test to see if deflections under load will cause the gap to close up to the point where the parts touch.? Lift up the wingtip and measure how much the gap closes.? Figure out how much force you lifted with and calculate the bending moment at the location of the gap.? Figure out the maximum bending moment in flight and the deflections should be linear.? (i.e., if the in-flight bending moment is 10 times that of your test, the gap closure will be 10 times more.) Of course, that will be a pain.? Far better to get one of our already-flying colleagues to tell us how big their gaps are!? I'd bet that none are less than 1/16 inch and none are as big as 1/8 inch. - Rob Wolf ________________________________________________________________________ More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com ----------MB_8CA2CC6589B1F08_810_1F5_webmail-md20.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Jim -

The ones I've seen at fly-ins don't seem to have gaps as large as 1/8 inch.  Maybe half that.  I'd say keep it as small as you can while keeping the gap even (at least on the top, where people see it).

You could run a test to see if deflections under load will cause the gap to close up to the point where the parts touch.  Lift up the wingtip and measure how much the gap closes.  Figure out how much force you lifted with and calculate the bending moment at the location of the gap.  Figure out the maximum bending moment in flight and the deflections should be linear.  (i.e., if the in-flight bending moment is 10 times that of your test, the gap closure will be 10 times more.)

Of course, that will be a pain.  Far better to get one of our already-flying colleagues to tell us how big their gaps are!  I'd bet that none are less than 1/16 inch and none are as big as 1/8 inch.

- Rob Wolf
More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail!
----------MB_8CA2CC6589B1F08_810_1F5_webmail-md20.sysops.aol.com--