X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:28:03 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from ncsusraimgo01.na.jnj.com ([148.177.2.32] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with ESMTPS id 2602315 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:49:57 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=148.177.2.32; envelope-from=GLaznic@MCCUS.JNJ.com X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,177,1196658000"; d="scan'208,217";a="109954841" Received: from unknown (HELO JNJUSRAGMH01.na.jnj.com) ([10.35.55.202]) by ncsusraimgo01-int.na.jnj.com with ESMTP; 17 Dec 2007 13:41:33 -0500 Received: from JNJUSFWGMS01.na.jnj.com ([10.2.16.161]) by JNJUSRAGMH01.na.jnj.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:49:15 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C840DD.85C13B99" Subject: RE: 320/360 Elevator RIGGING X-Original-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:49:15 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <38135B63A445784D8F3C3C80CDFB3EEE014D622E@JNJUSFWGMS01.na.jnj.com> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: 320/360 Elevator RIGGING Thread-Index: AchA3YV0Wqpk169vTACFwL5we6598w== From: "Laznicka, Garry [MCCUS]" X-Original-To: "Gary Edwards" , X-Original-Return-Path: GLaznic@MCCUS.JNJ.com X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Dec 2007 18:49:15.0567 (UTC) FILETIME=[85BB8BF0:01C840DD] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C840DD.85C13B99 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear Friend, =20 Thank you all who responded with help to my question. Really appreciate = it. Have a great Holidays. =20 Regards, Garry V. Laznicka L-360c 86% -----Original Message----- From: Gary Edwards [mailto:gary21sn@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 4:43 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: 320/360 Elevator RIGGING I believe the purpose is to have the bob-weight horizontal as much as = possible, so it can do what it was designed to do. In the vertical = position, it has a lot less effect. So, with that, closer to the = control rod is good. Also, the more vertical it is, the more it may be = in conflict with other items. Check for clearance in the vertical = position as it could contact the hat shelf close out panel. =20 Gary Edwards LNC2 Medford, Oregon Hi Garry, Glad to hear that you're still working on your 360. I would consider the = 1/4" figure in the manual to be a minimum. We certainly don't want the = lead=20 weight to be hammering the push rod. I believe that anything (within=20 reason) more than 1/4" would be acceptable. Since you're rigging the controls, you must be getting close to flight, = eh? Bill Harrelson N5ZQ 320 1,450 hrs N6ZQ IV under construction Looking at the page 15-28 Rev 6/04-01-99 in "Lancair 320FB manual" where = Figure-9a is depicted, it's specified there that with full elevator down = (11=20 degrees) the Elevator Idler arm (which supports the Bob weight) to be = 1/4"=20 from Rear push/pull tube. My question is: Would that be acceptable to have this distance at 0.59" Or is it absolutely critical that I have it at 0.25" I am maxed out on push-rods travel at this point. Thank you in advance for your suggestions and advice. Regards, Garry V. Laznicka L-360c 85% ------_=_NextPart_001_01C840DD.85C13B99 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear Friend,

Thank you all who responded with = help to my=20 question. Really appreciate it. Have a great Holidays.

Regards,

Garry V. Laznicka

L-360c 86%

-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Edwards=20 [mailto:gary21sn@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, December 14, = 2007 4:43=20 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: Re: 320/360 = Elevator=20 RIGGING

I believe the purpose is to have the = bob-weight horizontal as=20 much as possible, so it can do what it was designed to do. In = the=20 vertical position, it has a lot less effect. So, with that, = closer to=20 the control rod is good. Also, the more vertical it is, the more = it may=20 be in conflict with other items. Check for clearance in the = vertical=20 position as it could contact the hat shelf close out panel.

Gary Edwards

LNC2

Medford, Oregon

Hi Garry,

Glad to hear that you're still working on your = 360. I=20 would consider the
1/4" figure in the manual to be a = minimum. We=20 certainly don't want the lead
weight to be hammering the push = rod. =20 I believe that anything (within
reason) more than 1/4" would be=20 acceptable.

Since you're rigging the controls, you must be = getting=20 close to flight, eh?

Bill Harrelson
N5ZQ 320 1,450=20 hrs
N6ZQ IV under construction

Looking at = the page=20 15-28 Rev 6/04-01-99 in "Lancair 320FB manual" where
Figure-9a = is=20 depicted, it's specified there that with full elevator down (11 =
degrees)=20 the Elevator Idler arm (which supports the Bob weight) to be 1/4" =
from=20 Rear push/pull tube. My question is:

Would that be acceptable = to have=20 this distance at 0.59"
Or is it absolutely critical that I have = it at=20 0.25"

I am maxed out on push-rods travel at this = point.

Thank=20 you in advance for your suggestions and advice.
Regards,
Garry = V.=20 Laznicka
L-360c = 85%

------_=_NextPart_001_01C840DD.85C13B99--