Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 09:38:42 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from lakemtao08.cox.net ([68.1.17.113] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.3) with ESMTP id 2575849 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 11 Sep 2003 08:43:15 -0400 Received: from smtp.central.cox.net ([172.18.52.56]) by lakemtao08.cox.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.05 201-253-122-130-105-20030824) with SMTP id <20030911124314.SGNU16616.lakemtao08.cox.net@smtp.central.cox.net> for ; Thu, 11 Sep 2003 08:43:14 -0400 From: X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Dealing with the ES tail twist X-Original-Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 8:43:15 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Original-Message-Id: <20030911124314.SGNU16616.lakemtao08.cox.net@smtp.central.cox.net> I=92m about ready to put my vertical stabilizer on my lower ES fuselage a= nd am attempting to straighten the well-known tail twist. The horizontal= stabilizer is in place and is perfectly straight. However, the back of = the lower fuselage is twisted so that it leans 1.6 degrees to the left. = This twist cannot be removed without twisting the horizontal stabilizer w= ith it. I=92ve decided that I=92d rather not live with having the vertic= al stabilizer at 88.4 degrees to the horizontal stabilizer. = My proposed fix is to cut the sternpost with a small kink at the top of t= he lower fuselage so that it runs 90 degrees to the H. stab in the upward= direction. The vertical stabilizer will then be at 90 degrees to the H.= stab in the upward direction. I would then use body work (maybe addin= g a couple of pieces of quarter inch foam) to fair in the back of the low= er fuselage with the rest of the vertical stabilizer. This would widen t= he back of the lower fuselage by a little less than half an inch. Does this sound reasonable? Any =93gotchas=94 to watch out for?