Why don't we get a certified welder to weld TP12 to TP04 to avoid any
torsion stress on TP6 sleeve?
Tim
Tim Ward
12 Waiwetu Street,
Fendalton,
CHRISTCHURCH 8052
Ph :64 03 3515166
Mob: 021 0640221
email:
ward.t@xtra.co.nz
----- Original Message -----
From: R=C3=A9mi Guerner
To: europa-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 9:11 PM
Subject: Europa-List: Europa Tailplane - Mod 73
Graham and Mike,
I agree. Mod 73 is a very poor fix for a bad design. I like the idea
of he single tube with a flange.
I am also concerned about relying on a single pip pin to secure the
tail plane to the aircraft. As there is no way to visually check that
the pip pin is fully engaged and the balls are protruding below TP6, a
pull test would be highly desirable. A special plier would be needed
for that pull test. Alternatively, a big recess on the underside of the
tail plane would allow an uneasy visual inspection with a flashlight.
The rear wing pip pin can be checked that way. Moreover I like the idea
of a back up tail plane locking device such as the spring loaded lever.
Remi Guerner
F-PGKL, XS S/N395 monowheel, 912S, Airmaster, 487 hours
From: Graham Singleton <grahamsingleton@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Europa Tailplane - Mod 73
Mike
I agree with you. A simple redesign would be to make TP5 and 6 one
single tube, with lightening holes, weld a flange on it that bolts
onto
the inside of the root rib. Relying on a bond between epoxy and
stainless steel is not sensible. imho
I still wish we knew more about what went wrong with G-HOFC though.
Graham
Mike Parkin wrote:
> <mikenjulie.parkin@btinternet.com>
>
> Nigel,
>
> Unpopular as it may be, I think you are right. Mod 73 strikes me as
a
> very unsatisfactory fix for a poor design.
|