Return-Path: Received: from pimout1-int.prodigy.net (pimout1-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.58.53]) by truman.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219 ID# 0-52269U2500L250S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Sun, 20 Dec 1998 17:48:07 -0500 Received: from douglas (JCVLB104-13.splitrock.net [209.156.153.105]) by pimout1-int.prodigy.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA67036 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 1998 17:49:20 -0500 Reply-To: "Douglas W. Johnson MD" From: "Douglas W. Johnson MD" To: Subject: U-238 counterweights Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 17:54:54 -0500 Message-ID: <01be2c6b$c21484c0$69999cd1@douglas> X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Mime-Version: 1.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Dan recently commented on using depleted uranium as counterweights. Indeed weight savings can be realized if you use something with a specific gravity above that of lead (about 10, as I recall). Both tungsten and depleted U-238 have a specific gravity of about 19, and thus would be useful. Tungsten is very hard to drill out, however, and you must be careful not to overbalance TOO much (DL Simmons and I speak from experience) with it. Similarly, U-238 should not be drilled, as it can can have some ugly properties if heated. I have used three 1# slugs of U-238 in my rudder, embedded in a Tungsten block, and think I perhaps saved 5#. Up to you whether or not you think the effort is worth it. Doug Johnson (I deal with radioactivity every day, and just couldn't pass up the chance to use some of this material).