Emory Bored

In my experience there is seldom a w&b with the records CD.  I don't know why this is.  While it is a required document in the airplane, along with the operating limitations, I'm not sure it gets filed with FAA.  Like the logbooks, which are not required to be filed with FAA, it's just an aircraft record.  Operating limits may not be either.  I dunno. 

There will be Operating Limitations filed with the original airworthiness certification at FAA in OK City.  These may not have accompanied the bill of sale but they are there, and there is a record.  

I can't imagine why anyone would deliberately use a pair of SU carbs though.  He probably had them laying around in the bottom of an old cardboard box in the cellar.  

I've done this to small pieces for non aviation projects.  Lexan/polycarbonate does bend but it won't work for acrylic!  

I saw that one yesterday too.  Anybody want to buy a well along CH-701?  If I had a buyer for my Zenith that 5 would be in my hangar. 

E-mail this guy.  His name is Bill and he has or had a B model w/o engine that was ready to fly for cheep.  It's not in Barnstormers right now but it may very well still be available.  He owns the STC for tailwheel conversion of 172s and the like as well as a flap extension handle for a bunch of different airplanes.  Smart guy.  Well known in the aviation community.  
 
http://www.ezflaphandle.com

I'm like old Sargent Shultz on the Champion also but I'll hazard a guess or two.  1) It doesn't look enclosed to me.  I think the back of the cockpit cabin is open isn't it?  It reminds me of the Rans S4-5 types in that the seating position and cabin space seems rather limited.  2) There was a Ridge Runner with a 503 in it out here on the left coast a while ago that had folding wings, a decidedly conventional plan and construction with regular flaps, ordinary household variety ailerons, and a bigger more comfortable seating arrangement.  I haven't flown either airplane so who knows eh?  It seems like a guy might find a B model Avid project for similar money and end up pretty happy.  I dunno.  

Good morning Juan.  Welcome to the forum.  This topic almost always starts a fight wherever it gets posted.  Some folks believe that ones naturally developed "seat of the pants" experience will provide all the warning one needs to stay alive.  Yet, stall spin accidents continue to happen.  Who would -a-thunk eh?  For my money I'll just follow the lead of the US military on this one.  They use AOA and have for decades.  This is the one I like though I have not installed one yet.  
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/inpages/riteAngleBuddy.php?clickkey=41828

That's a very nice looking Sky Raider....and of course the Avid ain't bad either!

I'm not sure what the temp was at Vacaville yesterday but I know that my hangar doesn't freeze at 20F or even lower unless it sit's that way for weeks.  Sun on the hangar door keeps things 20F warmer than the outside.  Tough to imagine coolant with anti-freeze in it freezing up inside a hangar.  

Someone should mention "how" to contribute.  I think the last time I did it was from a paypal account maybe.  

I've been considering using riv-nuts to hold the fairings on my biplane.  They are currently held on with screws and nylock nuts requiring two people to get the fairings off for annual.  Not great.  I decided though, perhaps without merit, that eventually the riv-nuts would loosen and spin in their holes.  The grip length after all is only .016 or .024.  I've decided to use those *two hole wing doodies that rivet to the skin.  I think that the epoxy idea is a good one in your application. 
 
* "Two hole wing doodies" = AN366F

Those are great Joey; especially that last one.  Where are you in that photo?  Or asked differently, where is that located?  

I wonder if a gusset at the intersection of the diagonal brace and the horizontal gear member would make that less likely to crack?  Not that an over sleeve doesn't accomplish it.  I would seem to me that a break there would just cause the open angle between the main gear leg and the horizontal member just to open up and collapse.  
gear leg.pdf

I think I've made 2 or 3 cautionary posts on that thread warning that NOTHING is settled until the Senate and House bills are reconciled.  I don't think it will ever be signed by the president either; but I'm generally a pessimist.  The thread certainly has become a "world ends etc."  that's for sure.  I saw Leni's post right after it went up.  Way to go Mister. 
 
I don't hang there much any more either mostly because of the high dollar focus of just about everything.  
 

Humph.  The total destruction of a once fine automobile.  Or so say I.  Still, I know it's fun to tinker and the sheet metal probably would not have been much good after the wifely crash.  Not many of them left.  The 1.7 was the better engine.  

Really great pictures Joey.  I seem to recall that you started out as boom operator (probably wrong terminology)  on KC135s.  Are you floating back and forth between assignments?  I don't think the C5A is used in refueling....is it?  

It's about taking an environmental stand you know?  He doesn't run as many loads of laundry that way.  I used to strip down to the waist installing roof jacks for conduit penetrations.  Once you get the first dab of that black jack stuff on you, it's all over.  

Are the blue gizmos counterweights?  Good point on doing a new balance but it can only be better than it was eh?

I don't know ED.  Regardless of all this stuff Cessna, Piper and Mooney will sell no more airplanes than they sell now.  Half a million for a 182 just ain't a price point many can make.  The '70s were arguably the most successful market years since the mid '40s for general aviation.  I think a 172 cost mid $20Ks then?  The whole shootin' match is dying out I think.  I sure don't bring home 15 to 20 times what I did in 1975.  In any case I'm trying to get myself in just good enough shape to get an SI class 3 one more time.  We'll see.  

I've read and re-read what I wrote below in an effort to not piss anybody off.  I have no intention of doing that.  Sometimes we have to learn stuff we would rather not learn. 
No, I guess he wasn't.  I was and am.  The 120 hour course is comprised of just a little taste of practical methods and exercises and the rest was the presentation of resources and law.  To the extent that Joey complimented their "impressive resumes"  I think we agree.  He didn't think much of the curriculum as I understood him.  That's fine.  I hope he didn't miss that these aircraft are built under standards set by ASTM International and the first requirement of anyone signing off an annual inspection is to obtain the ASTMI approved documentation for the aircraft.  The annual is then performed according to that documentation which walks step by step through inspection and repair.  If there is any deviation from those steps and practices a letter of authorization from the holder of the ASTMI airworthiness certificate must be applied for and approved.  That letter then becomes part of the aircraft documents. The course could not possibly cover every detail of every powered parachute out there; so several hours were spent on how to get the resources for YOUR make and model of aircraft.  Similarly, if repair and maintenance is performed on Rotax engines then the Rotax approved repair and maintenance manuals must be consulted and followed.  Ditto for other engines approved by ASTMI.  Failure to inspect and repair according to this documentation is a violation of Federal Aviation Regulations and carries with it penalties in accordance with administrative and civil law.  Finally, these courses are reviewed and approved by FAA and include each of those modules,  including theory of operation,  as a complete package.  While it is true that Carol wrote most of the curriculum, it wasn't in the blind. The feds REQUIRED the courses to include this material.  So, the beef should be with the feds, not with Rainbow Aviation.  For now, the only place one can get these certificates is from Rainbow.  Perhaps others will write new course materials and open other schools.     
I hold a State of California life teaching credential for 7th through 14th grades in the subject area of vocational education.  I stand by my appraisal of their skills as teachers.  I spent years trying to convince young men and women that learning electrical theory and trigonometry for instance would make them better technicians in the career path THEY HAD CHOSEN. My point is that if you choose to obtain a license or certificate then you are required to learn and uphold the requirements of that license or certificate. Very smart people have determined over a very long period of time that theory is essential to understanding safe operating procedures and methods.  That's not just my opinion; ALL TECHNICAL SCHOOLS INCLUDE IT!  The students that followed my advice mostly ended up in supervisory positions while the others....well they hung on to their opinions I guess.  
 
I should add to the above lengthy post that lots of E-LSA aircraft have none of that documentation available.  Many where grandfathered in to the E-LSA category because FAA wanted to do something about what were called fat ultralights used in instruction.  Any S-LSA or E-LSA aircraft registered after the deadline for the grandfather interval had to have the full ASTM documentation and an approved S-LSA built and approved.  

This is true of course but I wonder how often these cables break in flight and what could be done to mitigate that possibility?  Preflight inspection?  Inspect at oil change?  In any case do the cables break as often as airplanes equipped with spring to open throttles take off across the ramp banging into stuff?  Friction locks fail too in my experience.  I dunno.  Just asking.