X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:22:56 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail02.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.183] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.11) with ESMTPS id 3412179 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:56:29 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=211.29.132.183; envelope-from=fredmoreno@optusnet.com.au Received: from Razzle ([202.139.5.198]) (authenticated sender fredmoreno) by mail02.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n05NtZpe030950 for ; Tue, 6 Jan 2009 10:55:44 +1100 From: "Fred Moreno" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mail" Subject: FW: [LML] Re: No more exhaust streaks! X-Original-Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 08:55:26 +0900 X-Original-Message-ID: <27FE5FA35973474E91BAAA151D9A6D69@Razzle> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0071_01C96FDC.8B949AB0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6838 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 Thread-Index: Aclvgxn9XzUfCAqWRBqBHU3LilgMHAADXbXQ Importance: Normal This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0071_01C96FDC.8B949AB0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 Very interesting. Just curious to why you didn't use stainless steel instead of aluminum. John Herminghaus Good question John. There were two reasons.=20 =20 1) Remember I was on Revision 7b, and at point I put a premium on = quick and easy fabrication to test ideas. Much trial and error. 2) Most important, there was a bit of aluminum in the hangar, but no stainless. If the aluminum does not last well, I will head to the = stainless fabricator in town for revision 7c.=20 =20 Fred ------=_NextPart_000_0071_01C96FDC.8B949AB0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Very interesting.  Just curious to why =
you didn't use stainless steel instead of aluminum.



John Herminghaus



Good question John.  There were two =
reasons.

1)     Remember I was on Revision 7b, and at point I put a =
premium on quick and easy fabrication to test ideas.  Much trial =
and error.

2)     Most important, there was a bit of aluminum in the =
hangar, but no stainless.  If the aluminum does not last well, I =
will head to the stainless fabricator in town for revision 7c. =

Fred=

------=_NextPart_000_0071_01C96FDC.8B949AB0--