From: Bryan Wullner <vonjet@gmail.com>
Subject: [LML] Re: 320/360 Redesigned over center drag link 250 hr update
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Monday, January 24, 2011, 12:54 PM

Hey Randy,

I have the updated link on my 360. I was just curious what size the bushing is and where do you get them when you need to replace?

Thanks

Bryan

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 4:57 AM, randy snarr <randylsnarr@yahoo.com> wrote:

For those of you that have the new over center link we built a few years ago with the bushing and steel sleeve, here is a 250 hour update on my airplane. I had my airplane up on jacks whilst rebuilding the hydraulic cylinders. I checked for play where the nose gear drag link connects to the oleo strut. ( the previous problem area) Mine had a very slight amount. Not enough to replace anything but I wanted to pull it apart and inspect it and report my findings to those of you that have these. It looks like the updated part we made is working very well. The pre oiled brass bushing had worn (slightly) as planned. I pressed in a new bushing, inserted the steel sleeve and the link is as tight as it was when it was new!  Time to replace was about 20 minutes and at a cost of $.63 for the standard size bushing... I still have a few of these links if anyone else wants one.. Please contact me off line.. Attached is a pic of the part when I was doing the bushing replacement. Best, Randy Snarr N694RS 235/320 "Flight by machines heavier than air is unpractical and insignificant, if not utterly impossible" -Simon Newcomb, 1902 --- On Thu, 1/20/11, rwolf99@aol.com <rwolf99@aol.com> wrote: From: rwolf99@aol.com <rwolf99@aol.com> Subject: [LML] Lithium Batteries and New Ideas To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thursday, January 20, 2011, 2:18 PM Michael wrote:   <<I do not want to start an argument,  but it is frustrating for people to say they don't like ideas based on out-of-date or incomplete data.   I am building an experimental aircraft to test and learn new things, for the pure joy of experimenting.  Please don't try to stifle experimentation without doing your research.>> No offense is taken.  No argument is intended.  Just a clarification.   My motivation was simply to point out that there is a significant risk that needs to be researched and mitigated by anyone who wants to make their own battery pack from new lithium battery cells.  I thought the original poster of the idea might be unaware of this particular risk.  I think I qualified my statement by saying that modern lithium batteries were outside of my area of expertise, and that while the risk/benefit of building my own battery was not favorable for me, it might be for him.  That's all.  I suppose I came across as a wet blanket, but the downside risk is considerable in this particular case.  He may be a professional battery engineer (or have a friend who is), knows that it will take a huge amount of effort to get it right, but be willing to do it anyway.  (Then he can sell his idea to a battery manufacturer and we'll all be buying his product, eh?  Capitalism at it's best!)   I'm doing some things on my Lancair that may make another person squeamish.  We all are.  But they are different things for each of us, partly based on our own level of comfort but also based on our own experience and knowledge.  That's the beauty of the experimental movement.  We can do what we each think is safe.  But I welcome anyone who says "this idea of yours may be dangerous, please check it out and make sure it's safe".  That's all I was trying to do.   I was also trying to express a legal disclaimer like Brent Regan's "I am an idiot, I know nothing", which in Brent's case most of us don't believe anyway.   - Rob Wolf

--
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html