X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 12:23:50 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from s466.sureserver.com ([64.14.78.39] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.8) with ESMTPS id 4383804 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 07 Jul 2010 11:02:58 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.14.78.39; envelope-from=dskeele@Wvsf.org Received: (qmail 29580 invoked by uid 1003); 7 Jul 2010 15:02:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ownerPC) (12.161.184.226) by s466.sureserver.com with SMTP; 7 Jul 2010 15:02:21 -0000 X-Original-Message-ID: <7A3BBC2276AD4739BAABD7D0E5FF59BE@ownerPC> From: "Don Skeele" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [LML] Big vs Small Tail on a LN-2 X-Original-Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 10:00:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18197 I can only add that with the big tail and a vertical strake beneath the fuselage, I had enough horizontal vibration/movement to crack the Sterling Polyurethane paint just forward of the vertical stabilizer- on both sides of the strake. No damage to the strake itself or fuselage. The paint job was about 18 years old at the time, and become quite "brittle" with age.. Reinforced the areas with 2 bid. With the added weight and surface of the big tail it would seem logical to add a horizontal bulkhead internally across this area, for added integrity.. Just some thoughts for the thread...