X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 10:28:04 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nm13-vm5.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com ([98.138.91.235] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.7) with ESMTPS id 6490962 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 26 Sep 2013 09:22:22 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=98.138.91.235; envelope-from=mcmess1919@yahoo.com Received: from [98.138.90.57] by nm13.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 26 Sep 2013 13:21:01 -0000 Received: from [98.138.226.131] by tm10.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 26 Sep 2013 13:21:01 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp218.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 26 Sep 2013 13:21:01 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 510526.29380.bm@smtp218.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: ZOBAHoMVM1kU_djpP.Kqxbc8LYx9dMg6uMB6tWVihY7Itfm 9IfqSU.BE3r9X3diBNJInUyaQuEt_CPqofSOJthF8TCFGK6vV3y0I75lyfRc m.QcbDQvBdy2GQSnVth818sdq5zFTt1nQ1yUJteCaUU59dalgyLaoi8RVIJL q3KxuChNb1LzytLFkN.hMMBeGgiYqnK.mFBBsWji398sB3gnNse3Eif4xOJy _ux_Fnaj0H9ouF28mjaNWlSGOrlMI7FWjBVRmnprsqxh92iDftuCdPVi8798 vWQzRe3_QEfs.RGMPE4bcpp3i7YT63KB.jWANlvEeqvIVrZVuk1fxYaNgGtf 4BYRmJrzTWwuOixsieqsyO5QJSz5kX3jMMcRg9674402qSgFtlj6iXU8cPb5 SZsbVXcaK9apdKtoa_mVFtqwYoicIUjVIkW1EloUWEY1cSKBwsCibM5DGutC QqyFTGObZkbpgHDp88klX2X0SZeR23JLgd2b75vtyKR3zLvbF7FzYi_1xLZk 1uUlUREmmZoqjZYSgiD2jbd3ui4unqPQ_.hdX4UhNP0fPQHAIooeaZQI- X-Yahoo-SMTP: rK4i7HqswBC7mDE8.sOiWQeO4CeReXc- X-Rocket-Received: from StevePC (mcmess1919@24.28.82.105 with ) by smtp218.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Sep 2013 06:21:01 -0700 PDT From: "Steve Colwell" X-Original-To: "'Lancair Mailing List'" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Question on Legacy MG Strut X-Original-Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:21:08 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <000f01cebabb$43919c70$cab4d550$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_01CEBA91.5ABB9470" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ac66rEZ8ByhuzRKRTFOGarlckajJyAAC7J/A Content-Language: en-us This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01CEBA91.5ABB9470 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have a ESCO P/N NGO-2000, S/N: 2107 nose gear strut on our Legacy. I = don=E2=80=99t know if it is the same as Mike=E2=80=99s but I hope it is = since it does look simple. The disassembled strut Scott showed us = looked more complicated as I recall. Scott=E2=80=99s point was many = design changes had been made so upgrades, parts and reassembly is = critical. =20 Speaking of motorcycles, I am restoring a 1983 BMW R80ST. I would like = to upgrade the forks with something like a Gold Valve mod. (Off list, = any advice?) =20 Steve =20 From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = steve Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 6:33 AM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Re: Question on Legacy MG Strut =20 I'm with Mike on this. I should be able to fix my own strut. I did have = lancair OH it before I first flew, $800 plus shipping and a couple of = weeks down time for the 320-360 . I would like the option of choice = .Steve maybe right about many ways to screw it up but so is the rest of = the airplane with far more danger. I built the engine from scratch and = is a lot more complicated then a strut.=20 =20 Steve Alderman N25SA 360 =20 -----Original Message----- From: marv To: lml Sent: Wed, Sep 25, 2013 12:06 pm Subject: [LML] Re: Question on Legacy MG Strut Posted for Mike Larkin : > Steve, >=20 > Really, have you ever opened one if these up? I have, it's very = basic. A > modern motorcycle strut is much more complicated. The bottom line is = I > should be able to buy wear parts from Lancair! I should not be told = that > you wont sell me parts you have on hand. >=20 > Attached are some interior photos of a nose strut. I have part = numbers and > local suppliers for all the needed wear parts. And I made the special = tool > used to take the strut apart. Total cost $25. >=20 > Mike Larkin >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Steve Colwell = wrote: >=20 >> I=E2=80=99m with Colyn on this, if Lancair wants to keep Strut repair = in house I >> don=E2=80=99t think it is about revenue on Struts. At the last = Lancair fly-in in >> Redmond a few years ago, Scott Decker who was the strut specialist, = walked >> us thru the many running changes that had been made. There are a lot = of >> ways to screw up if you do-it-yourself. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> Steve Colwell Legacy RG**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net = ] *On Behalf Of >> *Colyn Case >> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 25, 2013 7:59 AM >> *To:* Lancair Mailing List >> *Subject:* [LML] Re: Undeliverable mail: Re: [LML] Re: Question on = Legacy >> MG Strut**** >> >> ** ** >> >> I'm not sure of all the issues here but I can imagine Lancair needing = to >> make tough decisions where to put their resources. In any case, I = suspect >> more money flows into Lancair from the President than flows out.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> On Sep 25, 2013, at 7:51 AM, Mike's Gmail wrote:**** >> >> ** ** >> >> The funny thing! I use to be able to buy seal kits from Lancair. = Now >> that the President of Lancair owns the landing gear company, you no = longer >> can. In my world we call that a monopoly or conflict of interest. = Not >> very good for business. **** >> >> ** ** >> >> A hangar mate across the way got so pissed about this he just sold = his ES. >> Said if you can work with the company that made your airplane parts = I'm >> selling, and he did!**** >> >> ** ** >> >> ** ** >> >> Mike Larkin**** >> >> ** ** >> >> 424LL >> >> Sent from my iPhone**** >> >> >> On Sep 24, 2013, at 2:30 PM, Paul Miller = wrote:**** >> >> I found your note on the liability waiver and refusal to provide >> instructions an interesting position by Lancair. I'd like to expand = the >> topic and make a few comments about owners being able to maintain = their >> aircraft in an airworthy condition. I have personal and group = involvement >> in this matter with certified aircraft.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> For decades the alphabet groups and FAA and manufacturers have been >> fighting over the FARs that requires type certificated US aircraft >> manufacturers to make available airworthiness instructions to the = "owner" >> so that the aircraft can be maintained in an airworthy condition at = all >> times. This means instructions, parts availability, CRMs and more. = Many >> manufacturers have gone to extremes to satisfy that requirement.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Some firms like Airbus do not want to disclose proprietary data and = have >> purposely not adhered to the FARs in this respect and forced owners = to >> overhaul or replace parts at great expense. Those battles continue. >> Conversely, companies like Beech and Cessna have long made the parts = and >> data available and Cessna will even cross-reference Cessna part = numbers for >> original part numbers so you can go source the original or generic = part >> needed (o-rings, motors, brushes etc). King Air landing gear (for >> example) is arguably more complex than an ESCO strut but the Beech = gear can: >> **** >> >> ** ** >> >> a) be exchanged at Beech or**** >> >> b) sent to any shop of your choice qualified in that category or**** >> >> c) repaired and overhauled in your own hangar.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> That's because Beech makes available to owners and shops all the = Component >> Repair Manuals and instructions needed to accomplish the tasks.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> While Lancairs may be different because of the experimental category, >> these aircraft must still be maintained in an airworthy condition. >> Therefore, I would argue that Lancair should make the data available = to >> any owner or shop so that Lancairs can be maintained in an airworthy >> condition whether it be repairs, overhauls, inspections or whatever = is >> needed to ensure airworthiness. Those procedures and the parts = necessary >> to maintain them are part of what makes the Lancair an airplane--not = just >> the original kit.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> If I were running the ship, I'd do whatever I can to make the = operating >> costs for Lancairs as low as possible. I'd publish and sell a = complete set >> of manuals for overhaul and repair instructions (as TCM does for the >> engine) plus I'd offer to perform the work in-house as well (if that = makes >> sense). That makes for a very happy owner group and keeps costs = under >> control and allows everyone in the world to maintain an airworthy = airplane. >> **** >> >> ** ** >> >> It is the owner's airplane, the owner's strut and the owner's >> responsibility to maintain it in an airworthy condition. The data to = keep >> it airworthy is not proprietary and should not be locked away in = someone >> else's cabinet. That's just wrong.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> I could be wrong but I look forward to comments on that position and = I >> suggest anyone looking to buy any airplane simply ask where all the >> instructions for continued airworthiness reside. The answers can be >> revealing.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Paul**** >> >> On 24 September 2013 04:19, Valin & Allyson Thorn = > > wrote:**** >> >> Paul,**** >> >> Normally this work is done by Lancair and that is their strong >> preference. We wanted to do it ourselves for its educational value. = After >> some deliberations, Lancair agreed and required us signing a = liability >> waiver and they would provide absolutely no instructions but would = sell us >> the seals.**** >> >> ** ** >> >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Mike Larkin > LarkinAviationConsulting > LegacyL2K@gmail.com > 602-770-6054 -- For archives and unsub = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01CEBA91.5ABB9470 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I have a ESCO P/N NGO-2000, S/N: 2107 nose gear strut on our = Legacy.=C2=A0 I don=E2=80=99t know if it is the same as Mike=E2=80=99s = but I hope it is since it does look simple.=C2=A0 The disassembled strut = Scott showed us looked more complicated as I recall.=C2=A0 = Scott=E2=80=99s point was many design changes had been made so upgrades, = parts and reassembly is critical.=C2=A0

Speaking of motorcycles, I am restoring a 1983 BMW R80ST.=C2=A0 I = would like to upgrade the forks with something like a Gold Valve = mod.=C2=A0 (Off list, any advice?)

 

Steve

 

From:= = Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = steve
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 6:33 = AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: = Question on Legacy MG Strut

 

I= 'm with Mike on this. I should be able to fix my own strut. I did have = lancair OH it before I first flew, $800 plus shipping and a couple of = weeks down time for the 320-360 . I would like the option of = choice .Steve maybe right about many ways to screw it up = but so is the rest of the airplane with far more danger. I = built the engine from scratch and is a lot more complicated then a = strut.

&= nbsp;

S= teve Alderman    N25SA  = 360

&= nbsp;

-= ----Original Message-----
From: marv <marv@lancair.net>
To: = lml
Sent: Wed, Sep 25, 2013 12:06 pm
Subject: [LML] Re: Question = on Legacy MG Strut

P= osted for Mike Larkin <legacyl2k@gmail.com>:

&= gt; Steve,
>
> Really, have you ever opened one if these = up?  I have, it's very basic.  A
> modern = motorcycle strut is much more complicated.  The bottom line is = I
> should be able to buy wear parts from Lancair!  I = should not be told that
> you wont sell me parts you have on = hand.
>
> Attached are some interior photos of a nose = strut.  I have part numbers and
> local suppliers for = all the needed wear parts.  And I made the special = tool
> used to take the strut apart. Total cost $25.
> =
> Mike Larkin
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, = Sep 25, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Steve Colwell <mcmess1919@yahoo.com> = wrote:
>
>> I=E2=80=99m with Colyn on this, if Lancair = wants to keep Strut repair in house I
>> don=E2=80=99t think it = is about revenue on Struts.  At the last Lancair fly-in = in
>> Redmond a few years ago, Scott Decker who was the strut = specialist, walked
>> us thru the many running changes that had = been made.  There are a lot of
>> ways to screw up if = you do-it-yourself.  ****
>>
>> ** = **
>>
>> Steve Colwell  Legacy = RG****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* = Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] = *On Behalf Of
>> *Colyn Case
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, = September 25, 2013 7:59 AM
>> *To:* Lancair Mailing = List
>> *Subject:* [LML] Re: Undeliverable mail: Re: [LML] Re: = Question on Legacy
>> MG Strut****
>>
>> ** = **
>>
>> I'm not sure of all the issues here but I can = imagine Lancair needing to
>> make tough decisions where to put = their resources.   In any case, I suspect
>> more = money flows into Lancair from the President than flows = out.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** = **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> On Sep 25, = 2013, at 7:51 AM, Mike's Gmail wrote:****
>>
>> ** = **
>>
>> The funny thing!  I use to be able = to buy seal kits from Lancair.  Now
>> that the = President of Lancair owns the landing gear company, you no = longer
>> can.  In my world we call that a monopoly = or conflict of interest.  Not
>> very good for = business.  ****
>>
>> ** = **
>>
>> A hangar mate across the way got so pissed = about this he just sold his ES.
>>  Said if you can = work with the company that made your airplane parts I'm
>> = selling, and he did!****
>>
>> ** = **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Mike = Larkin****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> = 424LL
>>
>> Sent from my = iPhone****
>>
>>
>> On Sep 24, 2013, at 2:30 = PM, Paul Miller <pjdmiller@gmail.com> = wrote:****
>>
>> I found your note on the liability = waiver and refusal to provide
>> instructions an interesting = position by Lancair.  I'd like to expand the
>> topic = and make a few comments about owners being able to maintain = their
>> aircraft in an airworthy condition.  I have = personal and group involvement
>> in this matter with certified = aircraft.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> For = decades the alphabet groups and FAA and manufacturers have = been
>> fighting over the FARs that requires type certificated = US aircraft
>> manufacturers to make available airworthiness = instructions to the "owner"
>> so that the aircraft = can be maintained in an airworthy condition at all
>> = times.  This means instructions, parts availability, CRMs and = more.  Many
>> manufacturers have gone to extremes to = satisfy that requirement.****
>>
>> ** = **
>>
>> Some firms like Airbus do not want to = disclose proprietary data and have
>> purposely not adhered to = the FARs in this respect and forced owners to
>> overhaul or = replace parts at great expense.  Those battles = continue.
>> Conversely, companies like Beech and Cessna have = long made the parts and
>> data available and Cessna will even = cross-reference Cessna part numbers for
>> original part = numbers so you can go source the original or generic part
>> = needed  (o-rings, motors, brushes etc).  King Air = landing gear (for
>> example) is arguably more complex than an = ESCO strut but the Beech gear can:
>> = ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>>  a) = be exchanged at Beech or****
>>
>>  b) sent = to any shop of your choice qualified in that category = or****
>>
>>  c) repaired and overhauled in = your own hangar.****
>>
>> ** = **
>>
>> That's because Beech makes available to = owners and shops all the Component
>> Repair Manuals and = instructions needed to accomplish the tasks.****
>>
>> = ** **
>>
>> While Lancairs may be different because of = the experimental category,
>> these aircraft must still be = maintained in an airworthy condition.
>>  Therefore, = I would argue that Lancair should make the data available to
>> = any owner or shop so that Lancairs can be maintained in an = airworthy
>> condition whether it be repairs, overhauls, = inspections or whatever is
>> needed to ensure = airworthiness.  Those procedures and the parts = necessary
>> to maintain them are part of what makes the = Lancair an airplane--not just
>> the original = kit.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> If I were = running the ship, I'd do whatever I can to make the = operating
>> costs for Lancairs as low as = possible.  I'd publish and sell a complete set
>> of = manuals for overhaul and repair instructions (as TCM does for = the
>> engine) plus I'd offer to perform the work in-house as = well (if that makes
>> sense).  That makes for a very = happy owner group and keeps costs under
>> control and allows = everyone in the world to maintain an airworthy airplane.
>> = ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> It is the = owner's airplane, the owner's strut and the owner's
>> = responsibility to maintain it in an airworthy condition.  The = data to keep
>> it airworthy is not proprietary and should not = be locked away in someone
>> else's cabinet.  That's = just wrong.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> I = could be wrong but I look forward to comments on that position and = I
>> suggest anyone looking to buy any airplane simply ask = where all the
>> instructions for continued airworthiness = reside.   The answers can be
>> = revealing.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> = Paul****
>>
>> On 24 September 2013 04:19, Valin & = Allyson Thorn <thorn@starflight.aero
>&g= t; > wrote:****
>>
>> = Paul,****
>>
>> Normally this work is done by Lancair = and that is their strong
>> preference.  We wanted to = do it ourselves for its educational value.  After
>> = some deliberations, Lancair agreed and required us signing a = liability
>> waiver and they would provide absolutely no = instructions but would sell us
>> the = seals.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>
> =
>
> --
> Mike Larkin
> = LarkinAviationConsulting
> LegacyL2K@gmail.com
> = 602-770-6054

<= o:p> 

------=_NextPart_000_0010_01CEBA91.5ABB9470--