Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 13:25:56 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-5452551@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=76.96.59.243; envelope-from=rob@robmurawski.com
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Rain, primer, and paint
References: <list-5451261@logan.com>
From: Rob Murawski <rob@robmurawski.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <list-5451261@logan.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1332987586.48135@YjBxaCaA874IoqUZG2XICw

Lorn,

Does this advice still apply to 360s with the Mk II tail?  I was going to pu=
t static wicks on the elevators and wire the metal to ground.  Not necessary=
 for such a small area?

Obviously, there is no where to connect them on the wings as these are all f=
iberglass and can't conduct a path to the static wicks.

-Rob


On Mar 21, 2012, at 14:21, Lorn H Olsen <lorn@dynacomm.us> wrote:

> Tom,
>=20
> None of us other 320/360 drivers have static wicks. Nor do we have problem=
s that static wicks would resolve. Also don't forget that because our planes=
 are fiberglass, they are not conductive and therefore, without much effort,=
 the static wicks would be useless.
>=20
> Lorn
>=20
>> From: N20087 <n20087@yahoo.com>
>> Date: March 20, 2012 3:56:29 PM EDT
>>=20
>> Folks,
>>=20
>> Can anyone suggest a static wick solution for the 360.  How can wicks be g=
rounded (or should they?) on a non carbon airframe?
>>=20
>> Thanks
>> Tom
>=20
> --
> Lorn H. 'Feathers' Olsen, MAA, ASMEL, ASES, Comm, Inst
> DynaComm, Corp., 248-345-0500, mailto:lorn@dynacomm.us
> LNC2, FB90/92, O-320-D1F, 1,800 hrs, N31161, Y47, SE Michigan
>=20
>=20
> --
> For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.htm=
l