Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 09:51:09 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-m19.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.11] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 3052313 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 01 Mar 2004 06:15:36 -0500 Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-m19.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37.4.) id q.89.49d1855 (3310) for ; Mon, 1 Mar 2004 06:15:32 -0500 (EST) From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <89.49d1855.2d747554@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2004 06:15:32 EST Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Hysol 9339 Question X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1078139732" X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 4042 -------------------------------1078139732 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 2/29/2004 10:08:28 PM Central Standard Time, Newlan2dl@aol.com writes: All your points are valid. There is a very large tolerance for structures in these aircraft due to the "knucklehead factor". I suspect most planes we've seen are pretty well done structurally, whether the sticky stuff is kept beyond the recommended shelf life or not. For REALLY CRITICAL things, I get new resin and I don't mind spending a few extra bucks. But in reality, when Martin did the structural analysis, I think he had to design to the level of village idiot. Well, maybe a step above that. But a reasonable designer would figure that not everyone is equally talented and some excess tolerance should be given to those who's skills are somewaht deficient. Do I think I will keep this plane forever? No I don't. I'll probably need to sell it at some point for the next one to be flying. So I will plan on doing a very professional job and documenting it. Remember, as soon as someone makes something idot proof, they build a better idiot! Dan, Righto. I have used old epoxy for non-structural doodads (a technical term) while I have taken care to use epoxy within its shelf life date stamp for the important stuff. Remember, some of us actually built the wings onto the spars before those new-fangled fast-build kits emerged from the primordal flox swamp. Some of us long for the aroma of Saf-T-Poxy II, patiently waiting for the cure whilst new builders watch their 1/4 cup of Jeffco boil off because they thoughtfully lingered over some 2-inch-square pretty-boy cosmetic 1-bid patch (I think of Dennis Miller spouting that out at a mile a minute). I think the phrase you were looking for is: There is no such thing as a foolproof device since fools are so ingenious. Scott Krueger AKA Grayhawk Sky2high@aol.com II-P N92EX IO320 Aurora, IL (KARR) "...as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know." D. Rumsfeld -------------------------------1078139732 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message dated 2/29/2004 10:08:28 PM Central Standard Time,=20 Newlan2dl@aol.com writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>
All your points are valid.  There is a very large tolerance for=20 structures in these aircraft due to the "knucklehead factor".  I susp= ect=20 most planes we've seen are pretty well done structurally, whether the stic= ky=20 stuff is kept beyond the recommended shelf life or not.  For REALLY=20 CRITICAL things, I get new resin and I don't mind spending a few extra=20 bucks.  But in reality, when Martin did the structural analysis, I th= ink=20 he had to design to the level of village idiot.  Well, maybe a step a= bove=20 that.  But a reasonable designer would figure that not everyone is=20 equally talented and some excess tolerance should be given to those who's=20 skills are somewaht deficient.
 
Do I think I will keep this plane forever?  No I don't.  I'= ll=20 probably need to sell it at some point for the next one to be flying. = ; So=20 I will plan on doing a very professional job and documenting it.
 
Remember, as soon as someone makes something idot proof, they build a= =20 better idiot!
Dan,
 
Righto.  I have used old epoxy for non-structural doodads (a techn= ical=20 term) while I have taken care to use epoxy within its shelf life date stamp=20= for=20 the important stuff.  Remember, some of us actually built the wings ont= o=20 the spars before those new-fangled fast-build kits emerged from the primorda= l=20 flox swamp.  Some of us long for the aroma of Saf-T-Poxy II, patiently=20 waiting for the cure whilst new builders watch their 1/4 cup of Jeffco boil=20= off=20 because they thoughtfully lingered over some 2-inch-square pretty-boy cosmet= ic=20 1-bid patch (I think of Dennis Miller spouting that out at a mile a=20 minute). 
 
I think the phrase you were looking for is:
 
There is no such thing as a foolproof device since fools are so=20 ingenious. =20
 
Scott Krueger=20 AKA Grayhawk
Sky2high@aol.com
II-P N92EX IO320 Aurora, IL=20 (KARR)

"...as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we kn= ow=20 we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there= are=20 some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones w= e=20 don't know we don't know." D. Rumsfeld
-------------------------------1078139732--