X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 20:23:05 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nm5.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com ([98.139.91.75] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c2a) with SMTP id 4827507 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 17:06:10 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=98.139.91.75; envelope-from=randylsnarr@yahoo.com Received: from [98.139.91.66] by nm5.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 26 Jan 2011 22:05:34 -0000 Received: from [98.139.91.30] by tm6.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 26 Jan 2011 22:05:34 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1030.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 26 Jan 2011 22:05:34 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 891354.53377.bm@omp1030.mail.sp2.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 47530 invoked by uid 60001); 26 Jan 2011 22:05:34 -0000 DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=3OjsIy8sDO8zGnSANAKDyFXOS9a+AXs6xJNnB85tsroAIVjGfu8zAPY+6IrWYG2xdejHFEcLSS/3YBya0m1raGJPcUTtRzidTaKlqYneMOpAB71XJzon7mo/jdjS3owqAOMlh5EFyf9dLuwkMmY+29zMH29Vwu5jyxQfNCKYlAQ=; X-Original-Message-ID: <532888.42702.qm@web111415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: zWHrpW8VM1ngMYzYox14WF2Z1fXEsawJm.CVJbIJPOrKDmv M8bTmEzDIyRfjP1LUKnsbB10sF0rZ92jOPWWxb4JqexpfkHEVJZ9fDW41.xR BLRpqvPitZ50ZvXFHgBhF26HoYrgX7LsSt1gFD6LsCr6QgLymXxx_w46dzqa fXAki75CEFiRsmFy5Qnx8fmuVuHkmZwhqtfd.VkAg6hHtH4n2fB0yaoky38M i59nTImK_DZuoaGxxKuZheGaZOwsvb5tFUPro2xggDRbITk2T4LKlLlrLYKL rSXuBnfdB1ylmdTSzpwxtKsdBbs_3ZeZ4R7thF5aevQPYOhsCD47DQgpmv8U _rEKI0fQUygagdsrPSY9NRrTnvJMIIhmOiItFUvpLsoHknyRzPhvXmZbnhtp L_hUlnHrkRCHf Received: from [69.169.190.15] by web111415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:05:34 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailClassic/11.4.20 YahooMailWebService/0.8.107.285259 X-Original-Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 14:05:34 -0800 (PST) From: randy snarr Subject: Re: [LML] Re: 320/360 Redesigned over center drag link 250 hr update X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-756130219-1296079534=:42702" --0-756130219-1296079534=:42702 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable No sorry.. The legacy does not have the problem... They are just for the 320/360.. Randy.. "Flight by machines heavier than air is unpractical and insignificant, if n= ot utterly impossible" -Simon Newcomb, 1902 --- On Tue, 1/25/11, Rod Pharis wrote: From: Rod Pharis Subject: [LML] Re: 320/360 Redesigned over center drag link 250 hr update To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tuesday, January 25, 2011, 2:46 PM Do these fit the Legacy? =A0From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancairo= nline.net] On Behalf Of randy snarr Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 4:57 AM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] 320/360 Redesigned over center drag link 250 hr update =A0Fo= r 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 r= eplace 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!=A0 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 n= ot utterly impossible" -Simon Newcomb, 1902 --- On Thu, 1/20/11, rwolf99@aol.com wrote: From: rwolf99@aol.com Subject: [LML] Lithium Batteries and New Ideas To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thursday, January 20, 2011, 2:18 PMMichael wrote:=A0<>No offense is taken.=A0 No argument is intended.=A0 Just a cla= rification.=A0My motivation was simply to point out that there is a signifi= cant risk that needs to be researched and mitigated by anyone who wants to = make their own battery pack from new lithium battery cells.=A0 I thought th= e original poster of the idea might be unaware of this particular risk.=A0 = I think I qualified my statement by saying that modern lithium batteries we= re outside of my area of expertise, and that while the risk/benefit of buil= ding=A0my own battery was not favorable for me, it might be for him.=A0 Tha= t's all.=A0 I suppose I came across as a wet blanket, but the downside risk is= considerable in this particular case.=A0 He may be a professional battery = engineer (or have a friend who is), knows that it will take a huge amount o= f effort to get it right, but be willing to do it anyway.=A0 (Then he can s= ell his idea to a battery manufacturer and we'll all be buying his product,= eh?=A0 Capitalism at it's best!)=A0I'm doing some things on my Lancair tha= t may make another person squeamish.=A0 We all are.=A0 But they are differe= nt things for each of us, partly based on our own level of comfort but also= based on our own experience and knowledge.=A0 That's the beauty of the exp= erimental movement.=A0 We can do what we each think is safe.=A0 But I welco= me anyone who says "this idea of yours may be dangerous, please check it ou= t and make sure it's safe".=A0 That's all I was trying to do.=A0I was also = trying to express a legal disclaimer like Brent Regan's "I am an idiot,=A0I= know nothing", which in Brent's case most of us don't believe anyway.=A0- Rob W= olf=A0 =A0=0A=0A=0A --0-756130219-1296079534=:42702 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
No sorry..
The legacy does not have the pr= oblem...
They are just for the 320/360..
Randy..

"Flight by machines heavier than air is unpractica= l and insignificant, if not utterly impossible"
-Simon Newcomb, 1= 902

--- On Tue, 1/25/11, Rod Pharis <rpharis@verizon.net>= ; wrote:

From: Rod Pharis <rphar= is@verizon.net>
Subject: [LML] Re: 320/360 Redesigned over center dra= g link 250 hr update
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Tuesday, January= 25, 2011, 2:46 PM

Do these fit the Legacy?<= /span>

 

From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of randy snarr
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 4:57 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] 320/360 Redesigned over ce= nter drag link 250 hr update

 

For those of you that h= ave 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 air= plane up on jacks whilst rebuilding the hydraulic cylinders. I checked for = play where the nose gear drag link connects to the oleo strut. ( the previo= us problem area) Mine had a very slight amount. Not enough to replace anyth= ing 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 wor= king 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 t= ight as it was when it was new!  Time to replace was about 20 minutes and at a c= ost of $.63 for the standard size bushing...

I still have a few of t= hese links if anyone else wants one..
Please contact me off line..
At= tached is a pic of the part when I was doing the bushing replacement.
Best,
Randy Snarr
N694RS
235/320

"Flight by machines h= eavier than air is unpractical and insignificant, if not utterly impossible= "
-Simon Newcomb, 1902

--- On Thu, 1/20/11, rwolf99@aol.co= m <rwolf99@aol.com> wrote:


From: rwolf99@aol.com <rwolf9= 9@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 fr= ustrating for people to say they don't like ideas based on out-of-date or i= ncomplete 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.>><= /p>

No offense is ta= ken.  No argument is intended.  Just a clarification.

<= /div>

 

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 l= ithium 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 experti= se, 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 thi= s 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?&nbs= p; 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 fo= r each of us, partly based on our own level of comfort but also based on ou= r 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 a= nd make sure it's safe".  That's all I was trying to do.

&n= bsp;

I = was also trying to express a legal disclaimer like Brent Regan's "I am an i= diot, I know nothing", which in Brent's case most of us don't believe = anyway.

&= nbsp;

- = Rob Wolf

=  

 


=0A=0A --0-756130219-1296079534=:42702--