X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [97.68.172.111] (account marv@lancaironline.net) by lancaironline.net (CommuniGate Pro WEBUSER 6.0.9e) with HTTP id 6916155 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 02 Jun 2014 14:14:19 -0400 From: Subject: Re: Undercarriage bolt clearance To: lml X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser v6.0.9e Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 14:14:19 -0400 Message-ID: Reply-To: marv@lancair.net In-Reply-To: <6C509274-49DC-44D4-916E-A85A21503561@centurytel.net> References: <6C509274-49DC-44D4-916E-A85A21503561@centurytel.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit



Posted for Aaron Collins <nwacollins@centurytel.net>:


> Rob, Scott,
>
> Could this be a possible solution and/or addition? . . .
>
> If the original builder had to add any BID between the aft GM5 plate and
>the forward face of the rear center spar to take up any fore to aft slack of
>the GM1 weldment, could that BID be removed to gain some clearance room? Of
>course, you would probably have to add back the same bid to the aft face of
>the GM12 and GM13 phenolic mounting points so as to take up that same fore to
>aft slack that existed originally.
>
> If there is BID behind the GM5 and you remove it for clearance, the
>original bolts mounting the GM5 through the aft spar may now be a bit too
>long. Scott is always good to remind us about proper bolt length so check
>that thread count.
>
> Regards,
>
> Aaron