Return-Path: Received: from imo23.mx.aol.com ([198.81.17.67]) by truman.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219 ID# 0-52269U2500L250S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Sun, 21 Mar 1999 03:29:16 -0500 Received: from RWolf99@aol.com by imo23.mx.aol.com (IMOv19.3) id kNECa13430 for ; Sun, 21 Mar 1999 03:30:25 -0500 (EST) From: RWolf99@aol.com Message-ID: <41f9923e.36f4ae21@aol.com> Date: Sun, 21 Mar 1999 03:30:25 EST To: lancair.list@olsusa.com Subject: Extra Work X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Mime-Version: 1.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> In a message dated 3/20/99 9:36:27 PM, you wrote: <> This is a good question. There have been many suggestions for "improvement" to the Lancairs. Most of these add weight. How many aircraft have been built that are within 50 pounds of the factory weight? Not too many, I think. Some of us build in improvements for ease of maintenance, improved appearance, or just general "coolness". More power to you, that's the beauty of the homebuilt regulations. But my primary objective is to get a safe plane in the air at a light weight. I don't intend to stray too much from the plans, but... Would anyone care to list recommended changes to the planes with estimated weights? For example, how many pounds/ounces does replacing the brake nylaflow lines with Aeroquip 666 cost? What about the forward hinge canopy vs the parallelogram? Any other recommendations? Also, how much extra time to build in these improvements? Many posts say "I did this, it took x hours" This is very helpful. - Rob Wolf