X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 10:42:47 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from co9outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com ([207.46.163.24] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTPS id 6017738 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 21:04:25 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=207.46.163.24; envelope-from=rpastusek@htii.com Received: from mail51-co9-R.bigfish.com (10.236.132.242) by CO9EHSOBE008.bigfish.com (10.236.130.71) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.23; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:03:51 +0000 Received: from mail51-co9 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail51-co9-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933799A01FA for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:03:51 +0000 (UTC) X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:157.56.245.5;KIP:(null);UIP:(null);IPV:NLI;H:CH1PRD0710HT001.namprd07.prod.outlook.com;RD:none;EFVD:NLI X-SpamScore: -1 X-BigFish: PS-1(zz98dIzz1ee6h1de0h1202h1e76h1d1ah1d2ahzzz31h2a8h668h839h944hd25hf0ah1220h1288h12a5h12a9h12bdh137ah13b6h1441h1504h1537h153bh15d0h162dh1631h1758h1155h) Received-SPF: softfail (mail51-co9: transitioning domain of htii.com does not designate 157.56.245.5 as permitted sender) client-ip=157.56.245.5; envelope-from=rpastusek@htii.com; helo=CH1PRD0710HT001.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ;.outlook.com ; Received: from mail51-co9 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail51-co9 (MessageSwitch) id 1358474628857086_6505; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:03:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from CO9EHSMHS003.bigfish.com (unknown [10.236.132.249]) by mail51-co9.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF67FC2004F for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:03:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from CH1PRD0710HT001.namprd07.prod.outlook.com (157.56.245.5) by CO9EHSMHS003.bigfish.com (10.236.130.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.23; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:03:45 +0000 Received: from CH1PRD0710MB367.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.11.139]) by CH1PRD0710HT001.namprd07.prod.outlook.com ([10.255.152.36]) with mapi id 14.16.0257.004; Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:03:34 +0000 From: Robert R Pastusek X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: RE: [LML] [LNC2] Lancair 360 stub wings Thread-Topic: [LML] [LNC2] Lancair 360 stub wings Thread-Index: AQHN9FIuq5pjmNi380qQF/tI09FifphOVNmA X-Original-Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:03:33 +0000 X-Original-Message-ID: <41361035E6613244A377D5AC3BF5EFDD4A853C8D@CH1PRD0710MB367.namprd07.prod.outlook.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [72.9.2.42] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-Return-Path: rpastusek@htii.com X-OriginatorOrg: htii.com Rob wrote: Well, I started to attach the first of my stub wings on my Lancair 360 MKII= . I did the left side. After constructing a wing jig, measuring everything s= everal times, I thought I had everything lined up perfectly, but it looks l= ike I was off by about 3/32" in a few places... I attached some pictures. The trailing edge looks pretty well lined up which I also spent a lot of ti= me on. I'm thinking this is a small enough gap that I can use micro and build on, = but I'd like some expert opinions. The leading edge is the worst of it whi= ch was what I spent the most time trying to get lined up. Most of the top of the wing is lined up, but I have a 1/16" gap in a few sp= ots that I think I can just smooth with micro and go on. I thought about cutting the stub wing from the main spar and trying to re-a= ttach, but if this isn't that bad, I don't want to mess up anything more if= I can smooth it all out with micro. Rob, I think micro will fix you up nicely. You can improve the strength of the j= oint/fill by first filling with micro, then sanding to the contour and shap= e you want, then laying a single layer of glass or carbon cloth over the ar= ea. This adds some weight, but the fibers really strengthen the micro. I di= d this with the wing to fuselage fairing areas of my IV-P and have been ver= y pleased with the results...no cracks at all after 5+ years. Bob