Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Lightning-List:

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Lightning-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

pequeajim

Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 708
Location: New Holland, PA

Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:23 am Post subject: Lightning-List:

Nick:

  

 Every now and then, this question will continue to come up in the group.  Some folks that have not had the pleasure of being involved from the beginning of the list will naturally repeat the same question, and understandably so...

   

 I really appreciate your patience in thoroughly answering the quesitons, (each time).  All this does is show Arion's willingness to provide straight answers to the group, and it give us builders a reminder of the quality of the build of our aircraft.

   

 Thanks

 Jim!

 N730AL

  

 



 

 On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 1:11 PM, flylightning <info(at)flylightning.net (info(at)flylightning.net)> wrote:

 [quote]   

Group, 

  

The structure or tail section areas have not been lighten by 150lbs. The first fuselage shell, everyone knows as the prototype weighed about 140lbs. The current shell weighs 106lbs, a savings of 36 lbs. The flying surfaces in the tail section i.e.; rudder elevator horizontal tails, have been lightened by about 1-2lbs apiece. Saving around 6 lbs in the tail. Other structures like the wings are down from 98lbs panels on the prototype to 78 lbs on current models. The average weight decrease from the prototype has been about 80lbs. In no way did Arion Aircraft shave weight at the cost of structural integrity. Most of the weight savings came from new core materials, better use of resins thru vacuum infusion,  and yes somewhat lighter lay-ups where on the prototype the schedule was not what was called for in the design thru a mis-communication  long before production. The small void you may see in the leading edges of the rudder or even the vertical stab of the fuse is where the two parts meet and is not a issue. The flying surfaces are in-fact bonded together with a 2" wide bond strip on the inside which doubtfully you can see. This would explain why looking at the front it may appear that the surface are not stripped together when the are. This would be the case when looking at any of the bonded parts from the seam side. There are no seams in the leading edge of the elevator. The vertical tail section of the aircraft has a lay-up schedule of 4oz-10oz-core-10oz-4oz, this is the shell itself, the half's are than stripped together using 2 layers of 8" wide 10oz cloth, it is doubt-full that this area was " so thin it was not safe". All parts are removed from the molds and inspect for quality. They are than placed in an assembly fixture to be built. The fiberglass shop responsible for the parts builds many other aircraft parts of which several have STC's or PMA approvals and go thru very strict quality control processes. Arion Aircraft has chosen to use these same processes when manufacturing the components for the Lightning Kit aircraft .We pride our selves on a good light weight safe part and if a part does not meet this we would not let it out the door. It is possible that a part may be incorrect and we would certainly take note. Remember we put our butts into these things as well, fly family and friends and would never sacrifice a parts quality or integrity to save a few pounds.  

  

As for the pin holes, dupont sells a very nice high build primer which works well to fill them.  

  

Nick Otterback 



[b]

pennington(at)q.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 11:41 am Post subject: Lightning-List:

<?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /><![endif]-->  To the Lightning list

  

 It was not my intent to ruffle Arion's feathers. I simply wanted to  share my build experiences and possibly prevent a problem for Lightning  builders which could have easily been prevented. I can understand how protective  the Arion crew is about their aircraft. I would be too. Be that as it may,  I will continue to share my build experiences with the list, as I'm sure Nick  will continue to rebut. Looking at this from a different perspective,  perhaps Arion should be thankful that builders provide a "heads up" when  possible problems exist. This way, they could investigate and improve on a  beautiful product and perhaps save themselves considerable liability.  Truthfully though, I am more concerned with my safety and that of other  Lightning pilots than I am with Arion's feathers. 

  

 To re-address the issue of thin leading edges, I can assure you that I  didn't just fall off the turnip truck. I have considerable engineering  background and experience and I know "thin"! When I lightly  pressed on my leading edges, some edges had the consistency of tissue paper.  Likewise, some of the trailing edges had gaps of approximately 1/16". When  squeezing the surfaces together, not only were they not bonded 2", they were not  bonded at all.

  

 Thank you. Fly safe.

  

 Gary Pennington

 email: pennington(at)q.com (pennington(at)q.com)

  

 [quote]   ---

info(at)flylightning.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 12:43 pm Post subject: Lightning-List:

Gary,  

   

It would be very interesting to see this paper thin glass as you are describing. Tex has mentioned something similar however this was about kit#1. Your kit being a significantly later one I am surprised to hear of this. Also exactly what parts? Certainly not the vertical stab as suggested. The only leading edges that could exhibit this would be the horizontal tail and it is very unlikely that the leading edges are not bonded.   

I never suggested you fell off the turnip truck, but it is important to have the correct information before making assumption on why or how something may be done. What is thin? We are working on a metal aircraft here and to me the .016 skins on the horizontal tail are thin, now that does not mean they should be thicker, heavier is not always better. There isn’t a spot on the fuse or leading edges for that matter that are thinner than 0.0625 and that would be the leading edges of the horizontal tail, the rudder, flaps. That is than backed up by the bonding flange which is twice as thick. It is possible to have small voids in this, but no areas where the glue is absent. This may feel like a thin spot but is not a structural problem. Like wise with the trailing edges, you may be able to squeeze the tailing edges together and get it to separate, did you try using a feeler gauge inside to see if the glue was void or not? Take a picture and send it or ship the parts back for inspection, this is a good option.  

We welcome builders to share there issues and concerns that is what makes the product better. But get all the facts before making assumptions on how we took all this weight out and did not think about the structural integrity of the part. It is safe to say we didn’t stand back and say “that looks straight” when we engineered the thing either.  

I just speak form experience with the aircraft I have personally built 3, the prototype, serial #29, and serial# 59, so I believe I get a good look at the evolution the product and have a good spread of what we are putting out.  

   

If you have an issue share as you like but please send photos for reference and do not make assumptions.  

   

Besides Arion was not a Bird but a horse and has no feathers to Ruffle.  

   

Nick Otterback  

Arion Aircraft, LLC  

   

   

   

   

   

         

  

From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of GARY PENNINGTON

 Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 2:40 PM

 To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Lightning-List:  

  

       

To the Lightning list  

    

   

    

It was not my intent to ruffle Arion's feathers. I simply wanted to share my build experiences and possibly prevent a problem for Lightning builders which could have easily been prevented. I can understand how protective the Arion crew is about their aircraft. I would be too. Be that as it may, I will continue to share my build experiences with the list, as I'm sure Nick will continue to rebut. Looking at this from a different perspective, perhaps Arion should be thankful that builders provide a "heads up" when possible problems exist. This way, they could investigate and improve on a beautiful product and perhaps save themselves considerable liability. Truthfully though, I am more concerned with my safety and that of other Lightning pilots than I am with Arion's feathers.   

    

   

    

To re-address the issue of thin leading edges, I can assure you that I didn't just fall off the turnip truck. I have considerable engineering background and experience and I know "[b]thin[/b]"! When I lightly pressed on my leading edges, some edges had the consistency of tissue paper. Likewise, some of the trailing edges had gaps of approximately 1/16". When squeezing the surfaces together, not only were they not bonded 2", they were not bonded at all.  

    

   

    

Thank you. Fly safe.  

    

   

    

Gary Pennington  

    

email: pennington(at)q.com (pennington(at)q.com)  

    

   

  [quote]    

---

Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Guest

Posted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 2:50 am Post subject: Lightning-List:

To our man Gary,

  

 Frankly I am a little surprised that you thought the leading edges of the  wings and tail surfaces were structural since you have some back ground in  engineering.   But in your defense, you havent seen the factory and  how the wings go together.  I owe NOTHING to Arion other than respect  and friendship they have earned.  I have seen the Factory and was very  impressed. You may also not realize how light the loads are on Lightning  wings.  A ride in bumpy air will convince you of that!!!

  

 That the leading edges are not structural in terms of carrying the loads is  part of the reason they are thin.  No need to add weight  there. Likewise trailing edges.  Also it also makes a difference in  how you sanded and filled them  in preparation for painting, aggressive  sanding can also thin them out.

  

 It may also help your confidence to know that some of us have done multiple  Lightnings.  When someone hints that there may be structural problems with  the design and that they are an engineer,  it ranks up there with  insulting someones grandchild.   you are gonna get a response!!!   But we can take it.  You are family.

  

 Yes, some gaps or thinness may be present on the leading or trailing  edges.  We all know that.  It is just not a big deal.  Just fill  em with whatever, (flox, micro or cloth)  keep it light and move  along. 

  

 my $.02

  

 Doug Koenigsberg

 Not an engineer, but a half-hearted English major of epic  proportions.

  

  

 In a message dated 9/12/2008 3:42:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  pennington(at)q.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		     

   It was not my intent to ruffle Arion's feathers. I simply wanted to    share my build experiences and possibly prevent a problem for Lightning    builders which could have easily been prevented. I can understand how    protective the Arion crew is about their aircraft. I would be too. Be    that as it may, I will continue to share my build experiences with the list,    as I'm sure Nick will continue to rebut. Looking at this from a different    perspective, perhaps Arion should be thankful that builders provide a "heads    up" when possible problems exist. This way, they could investigate and    improve on a beautiful product and perhaps save themselves considerable    liability. Truthfully though, I am more concerned with my safety and that of    other Lightning pilots than I am with Arion's feathers. 

    

   To re-address the issue of thin leading edges, I can assure you that I    didn't just fall off the turnip truck. I have considerable engineering    background and experience and I know "thin"! When I lightly    pressed on my leading edges, some edges had the consistency of tissue paper.    Likewise, some of the trailing edges had gaps of approximately 1/16". When    squeezing the surfaces together, not only were they not bonded 2", they were    not bonded at all.

    

	


 

  



Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.

  [quote][b]

Clive J

Joined: 03 Nov 2007
Posts: 340
Location: UK

Posted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 4:11 am Post subject: Lightning-List:

Interesting discussion on structuality of leading edges (made up word).

I think I know what is being explained as I've filled a few myself but

could someone knock out a paint box sketch of the cross section showing

the phenomena?



CJ 



--

dashvii(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 5:01 am Post subject: Lightning-List:

As far as finding "holes" in the leading edges of tail services I have flown one that had a "crack" in the trailing edge of the horizontal stab.  Keep in mind that it was an Esqual, so different thickness, layups, etc.  I was very concerned and took it to Nick and Mark and say, 'I think I need a new tail."  They took a tool and stuck it in the whole several times and really tried to look in the hole.  In the end it was a crack through the gelcoat and the substructure was fully intact.  They told me it'd be fine to fly and they'd patch that up so that it looked right before the 40 hours were done.  Nick volunteered to fly the 40 hours off if I didn't believe him and I know that he wouldn't have done that if he didn't feel it was absolutely safe.  Nick is also protective of his clients and doesn't want to see somebody hurt themselves.  That is why I believe if Nick says you need a little more time before flying that plane solo I would follow his advice.  I'd trust him with my life and often did.  That was probably 2.5 years ago and the plane never had a single problem during the first 40 and is still flying today.  Brian W.

----------------------------------------

[quote] Subject: RE: Lightning-List:

 Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 13:11:27 +0100

 From: clive.james(at)uk.bp.com

 To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com

 Interesting discussion on structuality of leading edges (made up word).

 I think I know what is being explained as I've filled a few myself but

 could someone knock out a paint box sketch of the cross section showing

 the phenomena?

 CJ 

 --

pennington(at)q.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 5:40 am Post subject: Lightning-List:

<?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /><![endif]--><?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /><![endif]-->  Nick

  

 I believe you missed a great opportunity. An opportunity to  demonstrate to your customers that you really want constructive criticism from  them, rather than chastising them for it. 

  

 I have clearly explained the areas in question in my previous emails. I  will not repeat it. Further, I have already repaired the faulty areas, primed  them, sanded them and they are ready for paint. In the future, if I find other  areas of concern, I will photograph them and attach them with emails as you  suggest.

  

 Gary

 [quote]   ---

selwyn

Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 102
Location: Australia

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:24 pm Post subject: Re: Lightning-List:

 	  Kayberg(at)AOL.COM wrote: 	
		  

 Frankly I am a little surprised that you thought the leading edges of the  wings and tail surfaces were structural ........



You may also not realize how light the loads are on Lightning  wings.  A ride in bumpy air will convince you of that!!!

 	




Hmmm..   The leading edges, specifically the join between top and bottom skins are part of the "D nose" structure forward of the spar.  If that is not structural can anyone explain where the torsional loads in the wing are carried?



As for how light the loads on the wings are, in simple terms from the Arion specifications page, 1425 lbs at 5g is 7125lbs.  Thats light?

_________________
Cheers, Selwyn
Kit 66 VH-ELZ

Wayne(at)lpwa.net
Guest

Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2008 4:42 pm Post subject: Lightning-List:

Over here in Oz many of us read this list to stay up to date with happenings in the Lightning world – and I must admit some of us are often a little amused by some of the interesting interactions on the list.  In this case I will make comment because it appears that our US cousins, as usual, are being very polite – whereas I don’t suffer from that restriction.  

   

My beef (if you understand that expression!) is not with you Gary – but with your approach and technique.  I’m afraid that I feel if you were genuine in thinking that your main concern was to inform Arion of a possible issue, or indeed find out if there was an issue at all, you would have contacted them directly – which would have been faster, more reliable and more accountable (you would have had a record of communication with them).  You might also have done so way back when it occurred to you that something might have needed checking.  But it appears that you didn’t pass your observation on then (or check it then) which would have been the most logical time to do so if your purpose was to help Arion and/or other builders.  

   

From an analytical point of view, there is only a small part of what you have said that can be checked for accuracy – we have to trust you for the rest as it appears that all evidence of your concern has been removed in the build process.  Unfortunately, the only part that can be checked is your “understanding” that the tail has been lightened by 150lbs – and that verifiable statement is wrong.  This doesn’t help with confidence with the rest of your statements.  

   

Finally, this is public forum, used (mot unsurprisingly) by a wider audience than fairly well informed Lightning Builders.  Your release of a concern in this public forum prior to checking of the veracity of that concern directly with organisation concerned, shows considerable irresponsibility in terms of causing damage to organisation’s reputation.  I might go further and wonder if there is an agenda for the timing and manner of the action.   

     

Wayne Patterson  

LOUGHTON PATTERSON GROUP  

PO Box 398 South Perth 6951  

08 94742126  

  

         

  

From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of GARY PENNINGTON

 Sent: Saturday, 13 September 2008 9:40 PM

 To: lightning-list

 Subject: Re: Lightning-List:  

  

       

Nick  

    

   

    

I believe you missed a great opportunity. An opportunity to demonstrate to your customers that you really want constructive criticism from them, rather than chastising them for it.   

    

   

    

I have clearly explained the areas in question in my previous emails. I will not repeat it. Further, I have already repaired the faulty areas, primed them, sanded them and they are ready for paint. In the future, if I find other areas of concern, I will photograph them and attach them with emails as you suggest.  

    

   

    

Gary  

   	  Quote: 	
		      

----- Original Message -----   

    

From: flylightning (info(at)flylightning.net)   

    

To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com (lightning-list(at)matronics.com)   

    

Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 1:42 PM  

    

Subject: RE: Lightning-List:  

    

   

  

Gary,  

   

It would be very interesting to see this paper thin glass as you are describing. Tex has mentioned something similar however this was about kit#1. Your kit being a significantly later one I am surprised to hear of this. Also exactly what parts? Certainly not the vertical stab as suggested. The only leading edges that could exhibit this would be the horizontal tail and it is very unlikely that the leading edges are not bonded.   

I never suggested you fell off the turnip truck, but it is important to have the correct information before making assumption on why or how something may be done. What is thin? We are working on a metal aircraft here and to me the .016 skins on the horizontal tail are thin, now that does not mean they should be thicker, heavier is not always better. There isn't a spot on the fuse or leading edges for that matter that are thinner than 0.0625 and that would be the leading edges of the horizontal tail, the rudder, flaps. That is than backed up by the bonding flange which is twice as thick. It is possible to have small voids in this, but no areas where the glue is absent. This may feel like a thin spot but is not a structural problem. Like wise with the trailing edges, you may be able to squeeze the tailing edges together and get it to separate, did you try using a feeler gauge inside to see if the glue was void or not? Take a picture and send it or ship the parts back for inspection, this is a good option.  

We welcome builders to share there issues and concerns that is what makes the product better. But get all the facts before making assumptions on how we took all this weight out and did not think about the structural integrity of the part. It is safe to say we didn't stand back and say "that looks straight" when we engineered the thing either.  

I just speak form experience with the aircraft I have personally built 3, the prototype, serial #29, and serial# 59, so I believe I get a good look at the evolution the product and have a good spread of what we are putting out.  

   

If you have an issue share as you like but please send photos for reference and do not make assumptions.  

   

Besides Arion was not a Bird but a horse and has no feathers to Ruffle.  

   

Nick Otterback  

Arion Aircraft, LLC  

   

   

   

   

   

         

  

From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of GARY PENNINGTON

 Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 2:40 PM

 To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Lightning-List:  

  

       

To the Lightning list  

    

   

    

It was not my intent to ruffle Arion's feathers. I simply wanted to share my build experiences and possibly prevent a problem for Lightning builders which could have easily been prevented. I can understand how protective the Arion crew is about their aircraft. I would be too. Be that as it may, I will continue to share my build experiences with the list, as I'm sure Nick will continue to rebut. Looking at this from a different perspective, perhaps Arion should be thankful that builders provide a "heads up" when possible problems exist. This way, they could investigate and improve on a beautiful product and perhaps save themselves considerable liability. Truthfully though, I am more concerned with my safety and that of other Lightning pilots than I am with Arion's feathers.   

    

   

    

To re-address the issue of thin leading edges, I can assure you that I didn't just fall off the turnip truck. I have considerable engineering background and experience and I know "[b]thin[/b]"! When I lightly pressed on my leading edges, some edges had the consistency of tissue paper. Likewise, some of the trailing edges had gaps of approximately 1/16". When squeezing the surfaces together, not only were they not bonded 2", they were not bonded at all.  

    

   

    

Thank you. Fly safe.  

    

   

    

Gary Pennington  

    

email: pennington(at)q.com (pennington(at)q.com)  

    

   

   	  Quote: 	
		      

----- Original Message -----   

    

From: flylightning (info(at)flylightning.net)   

    

To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com (lightning-list(at)matronics.com)   

    

Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 10:11 AM  

    

Subject: RE:   

    

   

  

Group,  

   

The structure or tail section areas have not been lighten by 150lbs. The first fuselage shell, everyone knows as the prototype weighed about 140lbs. The current shell weighs 106lbs, a savings of 36 lbs. The flying surfaces in the tail section i.e.; rudder elevator horizontal tails, have been lightened by about 1-2lbs apiece. Saving around 6 lbs in the tail. Other structures like the wings are down from 98lbs panels on the prototype to 78 lbs on current models. The average weight decrease from the prototype has been about 80lbs. In no way did Arion Aircraft shave weight at the cost of structural integrity. Most of the weight savings came from new core materials, better use of resins thru vacuum infusion,  and yes somewhat lighter lay-ups where on the prototype the schedule was not what was called for in the design thru a mis-communication  long before production. The small void you may see in the leading edges of the rudder or even the vertical stab of the fuse is where the two parts meet and is not a issue. The flying surfaces are in-fact bonded together with a 2" wide bond strip on the inside which doubtfully you can see. This would explain why looking at the front it may appear that the surface are not stripped together when the are. This would be the case when looking at any of the bonded parts from the seam side. There are no seams in the leading edge of the elevator. The vertical tail section of the aircraft has a lay-up schedule of 4oz-10oz-core-10oz-4oz, this is the shell itself, the half's are than stripped together using 2 layers of 8" wide 10oz cloth, it is doubt-full that this area was " so thin it was not safe". All parts are removed from the molds and inspect for quality. They are than placed in an assembly fixture to be built. The fiberglass shop responsible for the parts builds many other aircraft parts of which several have STC's or PMA approvals and go thru very strict quality control processes. Arion Aircraft has chosen to use these same processes when manufacturing the components for the Lightning Kit aircraft .We pride our selves on a good light weight safe part and if a part does not meet this we would not let it out the door. It is possible that a part may be incorrect and we would certainly take note. Remember we put our butts into these things as well, fly family and friends and would never sacrifice a parts quality or integrity to save a few pounds.  

   

As for the pin holes, dupont sells a very nice high build primer which works well to fill them.  

   

Nick Otterback   

   

Arion Aircraft, LLC  

         

  

From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of GARY PENNINGTON

 Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 10:19 AM

 To: lightning-list

 Subject:   

  

     

Good morning everyone  

    

   

    

I have both a build question I would like to ask and a build situation I'd like to share with everyone.  

    

   

    

[b]Question:[/b] Does anyone have an easy way to fill those annoying "Pin Holes"?  

    

   

    

[i]Comment[/i][b]:[/b] While I was working on the tail and control surfaces, I found several issues that needed to be addressed.   

    

                 First, the fiberglass on the leading edges of the Rudder, elevator and portions of the Vertical Tail were [b]very [/b]  

    

                 thin, and in a couple areas, so thin it would not have been safe. I re-fiberglassed these areas for structural   

    

                 integrity. I understand Arion has recently lightened the tail about 150 lbs. For safety, it may be a good idea   

    

                 to add one or two pounds back.  

    

   

    

                 Second, the surfaces are laid in molds and the halves are then bonded together with resin or epoxy.   

    

                 Many of these bonded seams were not bonded or poorly bonded. Some were separated by at least 1/16".   

    

                 I used AeroPoxy to repair these areas.  It may be a good idea to examine your surfaces for the same problem.  

    

   

    

Thanks everyone. Fly safe.  

    

   

    

Gary Pennington  

    

email: pennington(at)q.com (pennington(at)q.com)  

    

   

   	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/contribution   title=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7 	  Quote: 	
		   	
8 	  Quote: 	
		   	
9 	  Quote: 	
		  	
0 	  Quote: 	
		  	
1 	  Quote: 	
		  	
2 	  Quote: 	
		  	
3 	
4 	  Quote: 	
		  	
5 	  Quote: 	
		  	
6 	  Quote: 	
		  	
7 	  Quote: 	
		  	
8 	  Quote: 	
		  	
9 	  Quote: 	
		  	
0 	  Quote: 	
		  	
1 	  Quote: 	
		  	
2 	  Quote: 	
		  	
3 	  Quote: 	
		  	
4 	  Quote: 	
		  	
5 	  Quote: 	
		  	
6 	  Quote: 	
		  	
7 	  Quote: 	
		  	
8 	  Quote: 	
		  	
9 	  Quote: 	
		  http://www.matronics.com/contribution 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		  http://www.matronics.com/contribution 	
1 	  Quote: 	
		  http://www.matronics.com/contribution 	
2 	  Quote: 	
		  http://www.matronics.com/contribution 	
3

      [quote][b]

Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Guest

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:39 am Post subject: Lightning-List:

In a message dated 9/14/2008 7:25:20 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  

Hmmm..   The leading edges, specifically the join between    top and bottom skins are part of the "D nose" structure forward of the    spar.  If that is not structural can anyone explain where the torsional    loads in the wing are carried?



As for how light the loads on the wings    are, in simple terms from the Arion specifications page, 1425 lbs at 5g is    7125lbs.  Thats light?



--------

	


 

  

 After I made my previous comments, I realized we were in for a  definition....a la Clinton.  I recently had this discussion with a would-be  engineer who tried to tell me a crack in a window frame on a building was  "Structural"   Then my civil engineer buddy got nasty in claiming it  was not structural.  One claimed it was part of the building, therefore it  was structural, the other claimed it did not hold up the building, therefore it  was not structural.   My take on the leading edge of a Lightning is  that while it is a good idea to have MOST of the leading edge intact; to have  some weakness in some of the areas is not particularly deadly.

  

 But there is a simple test.  Go to one of your wings and saw a slot in  the very leading edge 1 foot in length.  Then place a 60 lb bag of concrete  mix on it.  If the wing doesn't fall off, it was not structurally  necessary.  Lest you think I have lost my mind, here is the thought.

  

 We have 91 square feet of wing on a Lightning and a 1425 gross  weight.  That is 15.65 lbs per sq ft.  Since you brought up the 5g  load, make it 60 lbs. PER SQUARE FOOT.   Hence the suggestion of a bag  of concrete mix.   I doubt if it would even cause the edges of a saw  kerf to touch if the load is properly distributed.

  

 Looking at it another way,  the 5 g load is    .42 lbs  per square inch, (60 lbs divided over 144 sq inches) possibly less pressure  than  than I am using on each key to type this message.  Hence my  comments that it is a light load.  If you double that pressure to 1 lb per  square inch,  to simulate a 10 g load, you probably cant wiggle even the  thin spots using only 1 lb of pressure on a fingertip.  So while it is  possible to get some wiggle out of certain areas in the composite  airframe,  it probably takes 10 lbs of finger pressure to do so.  That  equals 100gs of force per square inch!!!

  

 The issue of  torsonal loads was raised.  If you remove ALL the  material forward of the spar,  the wing may twist a bit easier.  (but  there is nothing to exert the load since the leverage material was  removed)  But as long as the fuel tanks and the attach point at the  fuselage remain intact, there would be very little deflection.

  

 So if you sawed a one foot or even 3 foot slot in the very leading edge of  a Lightning, would I fly it?   Of course.  I doubt if it would  have any effect on it as long as the slot was not more than a saw blade wide.  

  

 As an aside,  I am trying to point out that  1) leading edge weak  spots are not a big deal....just fix em  2) that it is not necessary for  the wings to feel like steel plates for them to be safe 3) it is fun to think  about some of the number we hear kicked around 4) fly a Lightning on a hot day  with your seat belt loose.  that will teach you something about wing  loading!!

  

 from your favorite word butcher

  

 Doug Koenigsberg

  

  



Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.

  [quote][b]

Clive J

Joined: 03 Nov 2007
Posts: 340
Location: UK

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:14 am Post subject: Lightning-List:

I've not seen the construction of the Lightning wing but the joint

between the top and bottom skins is made up with something, adhesive

bead with glass cloth overlay?. The structure of the wing must be

supported in some way by the skin(s) whether it is taken credit for is

another matter I suppose but it needs to stay stuck together.



Can't someone do a sketch of the cut through the wing to show what joins

the top to the bottom of the leading edge or the left to the right on

the tail. As I suggested a few days ago?. The crack at the join, which

you can probably put your finger nail in in places, is the bit that

looks a bit 'daggy' (new word I got from Southern hemisphere) but it

doesn't mean there isn't something behind it that is holding the two

skins or sides of the monocot together. On my Esqual it looks to be

glass cloth over adhesive as I mentioned above but I don't know what's

in the bits that were closed up when I got them.



CJ



--

info(at)flylightning.net
Guest

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 5:06 am Post subject: Lightning-List:

Gary,  

   

Please if at any time you find something in question send as many photos as you like and notes to go along with it. We do hope that customers will come to us with any issues so we can resolve them however needed.   

Constructive criticism is important and well taken here that is how We can evolve our product and make things better and safer for the next customer down the road.                                                                                                                                            

   

Nick Otterback  

Arion Aircraft, LLC  

         

  

From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of GARY PENNINGTON

 Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2008 8:40 AM

 To: lightning-list

 Subject: Re: Lightning-List:  

  

       

Nick  

    

   

    

I believe you missed a great opportunity. An opportunity to demonstrate to your customers that you really want constructive criticism from them, rather than chastising them for it.   

    

   

    

I have clearly explained the areas in question in my previous emails. I will not repeat it. Further, I have already repaired the faulty areas, primed them, sanded them and they are ready for paint. In the future, if I find other areas of concern, I will photograph them and attach them with emails as you suggest.  

    

   

    

Gary  

  [quote]    

---

Clive J

Joined: 03 Nov 2007
Posts: 340
Location: UK

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 8:01 am Post subject: Lightning-List:

Sketch, I'm curious now. Can Nick enlighten me? As I'm sure the Esqual

is built the same. 

Are the smaller structures like this but without the glass cloth? How

would you get the cloth in?



CJ 



--

pequeajim

Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 708
Location: New Holland, PA

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:13 am Post subject: Lightning-List:

For



 On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 11:58 AM, James, Clive R <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com (clive.james(at)uk.bp.com)> wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Sketch, I'm curious now. Can Nick enlighten me? As I'm sure the Esqual

is built the same.

Are the smaller structures like this but without the glass cloth? How

 would you get the cloth in?



CJ

	
 For some of you that are curious about the Lightning construction, you can go to the contractor's site that does all the manufacturing of the parts and look at some of the pictures.  It gives you an idea of the enormity of the operation.  Now granted, they are doing a lot of other work there as well, but you will see some pictures with Lightning parts in them.

   

 http://www.customfiberglassmolding.com

  

 Jim!

  [quote][b]

selwyn

Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 102
Location: Australia

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 3:19 pm Post subject: Re: Lightning-List:

 	  Clive J wrote: 	
		  Sketch, I'm curious now. Can Nick enlighten me? As I'm sure the Esqual

is built the same. 

Are the smaller structures like this but without the glass cloth? How

would you get the cloth in?



CJ 



-- 	




Hi Clive,



I expect Nick may do a better job of this later on but, looking at my wing, I can see that the lower surface skin wraps right around the leading edge and extends for an inch and a half or so under the top skin.  The top skin is laid over this flange and the two bonded together.  In mine I can see the holes where screws or some such were used to hold the mating surfaces together while the thing cured. 



This means that the very leading edge is not where the strength is developed, and gaps right there probably only extend in to meet the bottom skin as it curves up and under the top skin and don't mean much except the filler job at the factory was a bit rough.  The strength is where the bottom skin is overlaid by the top skin.



This method is used on many composite sailplanes and is quite successful with these very long, very high aspect ratio wings.



To Doug and your comments about sawing slots in leading edges and the like, my recommendation to you is to put those English skills to use reading up on some basic aircraft structures and flight loads information.

_________________
Cheers, Selwyn
Kit 66 VH-ELZ

Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Guest

Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 5:50 pm Post subject: Lightning-List:

In a message dated 9/15/2008 7:20:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time,  selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  

This    means that the very leading edge is not where the strength is developed, and    gaps right there probably only extend in to meet the bottom skin as it curves    up and under the top skin and don't mean much except the filler job at the    factory was a bit rough.  The strength is where the bottom skin is    overlaid by the top skin.



This method is used on many composite    sailplanes and is quite successful with these very long, very high aspect    ratio wings.



To Doug and your comments about sawing slots in leading    edges and the like, my recommendation to you is to put those English skills to    use reading up on some basic aircraft structures and flight loads    information.

	


 

 Selwyn,

  

 Putting my English skillS to work,  MAY THE BIRD OF PARADISE FLY UP  YOUR NOSE!!!!

  

 But seriously, we agree about one thing.  "The leading edge is not  where strength is developed."

  

 Pardon me for not making that clear.

  

  

  

 Doug



Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.

  [quote][b]

selwyn

Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 102
Location: Australia

Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:12 am Post subject: Re: Lightning-List:

No Doug, I don't think we agree on very much about wing strength except that it is nice to have enough.   The join between the top and bottom skins at the leading edge is a very important join in terms of the strength of the wing, it just does not occur precisely on the leading edge in this particular case.



In relation to the bird of paradise, I've been accused of having a decent sized hooter but, even given that, I think the tail feathers would still be hanging out.



[quote="Kayberg(at)AOL.COM"]In a message dated 9/15/2008 7:20:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time,  selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  

This    means that the very leading edge is not where the strength is developed, and    gaps right there probably only extend in to meet the bottom skin as it curves    up and under the top skin and don't mean much except the filler job at the    factory was a bit rough.  The strength is where the bottom skin is    overlaid by the top skin.



This method is used on many composite    sailplanes and is quite successful with these very long, very high aspect    ratio wings.



To Doug and your comments about sawing slots in leading    edges and the like, my recommendation to you is to put those English skills to    use reading up on some basic aircraft structures and flight loads    information.

	


 

 Selwyn,

  

 Putting my English skillS to work,  MAY THE BIRD OF PARADISE FLY UP  YOUR NOSE!!!!

  

 But seriously, we agree about one thing.  "The leading edge is not  where strength is developed."

  

 Pardon me for not making that clear.

  

  

  

 Doug



Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.

   	  Quote: 	
		  [b]

_________________
Cheers, Selwyn
Kit 66 VH-ELZ

Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Guest

Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 5:50 am Post subject: Lightning-List:

In a message dated 9/16/2008 4:14:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time,  selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  

No    Doug, I don't think we agree on very much about wing strength except that it    is nice to have enough.   The join between the top and bottom skins    at the leading edge is a very important join in terms of the strength of the    wing, it just does not occur precisely on the leading edge in this particular    case.



In relation to the bird of paradise, I've been accused of having    a decent sized hooter but, even given that, I think the tail feathers would    still be hanging out.



	


 

  

 S,

  

 Since one of my nicknames was "Koenigsbeak"   I suppose I am over  sensitive to  nose stuff and tried to pass it on to you.     My apologies to Little Jimmy Dickens. 

  

 And since I am oversensitive about people thinking everything on an  airplane is "structural" I am reacting to implications that if a few spots on  the very leading edge of a Lightning seem thin it is a big tragidy.    My problem is that I build an ultralight based plane as well as  Lightnings.  While they are polar opposites in design, they are both very  strong airframes.  but more than that, they carry the structural loads very  differently.  I get tired of people who have no experience with either one  but presume to know a lot because they have flown spam cans for some time.   But the lack of experience doesnt stop them from telling me how I should do  things.  Perhaps I am both oversensitive and hypocritcal.

  

 I will stand my my assertion that if you have a spot in the leading edge of  a Lightning surface that is less than 3-4 inches wide it is no cause for  concern.  The leading edge does not carry the airplane, the rest of the  skins and spars do.   Further, if you have to apply more than a couple  pounds of pressure to make that spot move, you are vastly exceeding the load  that surface would be expected to bear.

  

 Of course it is reasonable to fill or repair that spot, but it is a very  small matter.

  

 And thus I shall conclude my vast assertions of dubious portent.

  

 Doug Koenigsberg



Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.

  [quote][b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Lightning-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum