Ken Miller wrote: No confusion for me. It seemed pretty clear. Well, maybe some confusion from someone who might have jumped to some unstated conclusion before reading the entire post. Been there, don

"cozy.3" wrote: People will forget something many more times than hardware will. Yes, hardware can break, but the odds are in favor of a person forgetting, not hardware failure. Such things exist, not

I am claiming to be NOT an expert, Ok? "William B. Swears" wrote: I'd think that oil in the rocker cover would not get hot enough to cause such problems. If the area was full of oil, then I'd wonder w

J-------ohn Slade wrote: This caught my attention. For an example I did some years ago, which was based upon refurbishing old ultralights, take a look at 'Refurbishing Guide' at www.dfeul.com. Beware,

David Domeier wrote: I think I'd agree with your observation. A major reason is proficiency. To be good at something, you must practice, and do it often. With the cost of renting even a 150 or such, i

David Domeier wrote: Interesting discussion. On the subject of ignoring human failure, I agree 100% with DD. However, "accommodating this circumstance" is a bit much. Any pilot who isn't willing to ac

Yeah, I've seen it too. Some pilots feel what they're doing, and some just move the control. When I started on hang gliders back in 1973 the guy that was helping me commented on the very small movemen

xf4gewo@... wrote: Not familiar with what you are describing, but, if the AN4-7A is too long, will an AN4-6A work? I wouldn't want to start cutting the AN hardware. Both should have shank lengths

Dale Martin wrote: And now that we've re-invented the the heat sensor .... Ok, I'll quit picking. However, these new ideas are great for ideas, but now if you want to have some fun, you'll test the id

Joe Person wrote: I've wondered about such modifications. Are there problems/concerns with the size of the mid spar section? Strakes? Anything else dependent upon the width of the fuselage? Dave

Candy and Bruce wrote: Well, everything's relative. The $2K starts to seem smaller when you look at the asking price for the Blue Mountain set-up, almost $10K. Then again, when you're looking for the

beasley1984@... wrote: Think a bit about the role of the foam. It is strictly filler between two sheets of fiberglass. The strength is in the fiberglass, and a flat piece of fiberglass is strong

Graham Singleton wrote: It's been my impression that the VEZ uses C-90, O-200, and such engines. Isn't the 0-200 engine somewhere around 100 HP? What does it weigh? Dave [portions of this message have

Elsingers wrote: Your statement about wanting to fly now/soon defines the solution. You have some things going for you. One is age. If you can finish something you'll have plenty of time to fly it. Ot

Flying Tiger wrote: This causes some speculation. Reduced roll rate would normally (well, for me) indicate less aileron authority. However, it could be increased stability. Quite interesting. For some

Louis Stedman wrote: If an engine appears to have a problem, it usually does. Not an expert, more a victim. Good engines will work for a while with a problem, but usually it only gets worse, and more

bw wrote: community criminal Self interest. Purely self interest. Anything to do with aviation doesn't want to get into a courtroom, and 'unknown' and 'unclassifiable' and such are not things any insu

ronald GOWAN wrote: charged So the task is to keep the aircraft in the air longer, and without the need of running the rocket engine. Interesting challenge. Maybe under tow? Can't go anywhere, so that

David Domeier wrote: From the way this question is asked, the poster seems serious. So, a bit of a serious answer. XCOR is designing, testing, and proving a relatively low cost rocket engine. In addit

Byers, Walt wrote: > Dave/all: The persons who started XCOR used their own money to get a rocket engine development program going and produce some prototypes. One (I guess now two?) of the prototype e