HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: earlb@ssd.intel.com (Earl Brabandt)
Subject: Re: Painting strategies?
Organization: Supercomputer Systems Division (SSD), Intel
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:59:07 GMT

In article <297.148.uupcb@pcs.sj.ca.us> paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett)  writes:
>
>In the case of polyurethane paints, the curing catalyst is typically
>toluene di-isocyanate or another isocyanate.  
>
>In any case, I advise everyone to apply exhaust ventilation _first_ and
>respiratory protection _second_ - and understand how to do the
>respiratory protection properly.
>
>(PS - I'm an ex-OSHA inspector / part-time Industrial Hygienist - <G>)

It's my understanding that no filter masks are approved for isocyanates.
It seems the human "smell threshold" for detecting the stuff is at a level
much higher than the recognized safe concentration level.  Thus, you have
no way of detecting an unsafe situation by smell.  

Is detection the only issue, or are the carbon filters ineffective at 
filtering the isocyanates as well?

Maybe Paul could lend some insight.

Earl Brabandt RV-6 N66VR (in progress)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: beede@sctc.com (Mike Beede)
Subject: Re: Flying Saucers
Organization: SCTC
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 00:10:13 GMT

>DH>I'm waiting for a craft that works on the Frisbee principle
>  >of flying.  You could conceivably build a flying machine that
>  >is frisbee shaped, with a rotating outer hull.

>>As in Jules Verne's gun in _From the Earth to the Moon_, launch would b
>>hard on the occupants, wouldn't it?  <G>

I don't know -- how hard could anybody throw it, anyway?

	Mike
-- 
Mike Beede         Secure Computing
beede@sctc.com     1210 W. County Rd E, Suite 100           
------------------ Arden Hills, MN  55112
                    (612) 482-7420
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: inglis_p@apollo.HP.COM ()
Subject: Capella Info Needed
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 15:32:23 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Chelmsford, MA
Keywords: Capella

One of our members is in the process of buying a
Capella kit.  Does anyone out there have any
experiences/opinions to share. All input would
be greatly appreciated.

Pete Inglis
EAA Chapter 917


Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: doshay@ursa.arc.nasa.gov (David Doshay)
Subject: Re: Flying homebuilts outside USA.
Keywords: regulations.
Organization: NASA-Ames Biocomputation Center
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:03:07 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.161346.19885@cbnews.cb.att.com>, tel@cbnews.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lester) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov17.115817@xerox.com> spencer.wbst129@xerox.com (Andrew Spencer) writes:
|> >
|> >If I were to build say, a Lancair, could I fly it in Canada or Mexico?
|> >
|>     No!  The US experimental registration is restricted to US air space.
|> -- 


There have been articles in Sport Aviation about homebuilts going to the
distant parts of South America, so it has been done. The paper work is to
be expected.

David		doshay@soma.arc.nasa.gov

The thought police insist I tell you:
my thoughts, not NASA's
From: dent@s1.gov (Dave Dent)
Subject: Rotax 912 Experience
Followup-To: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Organization: LLNL
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:19:00 GMT

I am looking for information on the Rotax 912 engine.  Users and alike that
have been flying or using it.  I would like information related to TBO's,
not published but actual,  or any major items found during overhaul.   Any
problems that may have come up during use such as valve failures, cooling,
ignition, fuel system, oil pump, etc.  We're doing research on one now  and
any addional information you might have would be a big help.  Please E-mail
responses to dent@s1.gov.  Thanks in advance.                    

Dave Dent
Lawrence  Livermore  National Laboratory
7000 East Ave., P.O. Box 808, MS L-285
Livermore, CA 94550
510-294-6596,  E-Mail dent@s1.gov
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: aboyd@quantum.on.ca (Andrew Boyd)
Subject: Re: Homebuilt IFR in Canada
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 17:15:31 GMT
Organization: Quantum Software Systems

In article <BxzHHK.4yB@ccu.umanitoba.ca> umpistun@ccu.umanitoba.ca 
(Brent Pistun) writes:
>    Flying homebuilts IFR in Canada is still illegal...  I would imagine
>that should be changing in the next little while...

well, flying canadian-built homebuilts IFR in canada is illegal.  But
the DOT are funny critters ... practically speaking, I don't think
anyone would complain if you flew your US homebuilt IFR in canada,
unless you had an accident, in which case, yes, you might start
confusing lawyers & proctologists.

See, the canadian DOT cannot prosecute you directly ... even if
you really really piss someone off, and the DOT decides to get you,
all they can do is hand off the complaint to your FAA.  The FAA
will probably say, "So?  Who cares?  It's legal in the ol' USA".

A similar situation might be VFR-over-the-top, which is technically
illegal in canada.  Ever heard of an american getting busted by 
the FAA for flying VFR over a broken layer in canada?  Me neither.
----
#include <std.disclaimer>
From: stivers@etec.com (Robert Stivers)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Painting strategies?
Date: 17 Nov 1992 19:19:34 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

My partner and I are far enough along with our Kitfox IV to start
thinking about how we're going to paint her. With no experience, is it 
too difficult to do ourselves? How much do the pros cost?
 
Any suggestions are appreciated.

		-Rob
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: cap@selway.umt.edu (Charles A. Smith)
Subject: Re: Prop-speed reduction units and torsional vibration
Summary: changing the natural frequency
Organization: University of Montana
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 17:05:27 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.135938.12165@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>, Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott) writes:

re: clutch springs as a solution to torsional vibration...

> EAA's "Experimenter", Bill Husa says the following: "This installation
> demonstrates a clear misunderstanding of the phenomenon. The springs in
> the plate only change the natural frequency of the vibration (changes
> the system's spring constant), the configuration has no ability to
> absorb and dissipate the vibrational energy. 

I read this article too, and I'm not sure if the use of clutch springs 
are really evidence of a misunderstanding of the phenomenon.  In many years 
of designing rotating systems, I tried a number of different methods to
reduce vibrations.  Changing the natural frequency of the system is a 
standard solution.  Another standard solution is to damp the system so 
that the amplitude of the vibration is reduced.  Another way is to introduce
a non-linearity into the system, such as the sprague clutch mentioned in Husa's
article.

This subject is rather involved, and rather than hold forth at greater
length, I'll simply say that in some specific situation, the clutch-spring
solution may work quite well.

Cap "Stress and Vibration Analyst, retired" Smith

-- 
Cap Smith                 Assistant Prof. of MIS           
cap@selway.umt.edu        University of Montana
From: paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett) 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: CFV: rec.crafts.metalworking
Date: 17 Nov 92 15:58:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: PCS-BBS - San Jose, CA - 408-270-4085
Reply-To: paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett) 

TO: metalyes@corral.uwyo.edu


Voting yes.  Interested both in homeshop and industrial applications - I
am (among other things) an OSHA inspector, and I "do" machine shops
occasionally.

---
 . OLX 3.0 07-2042 . ...from San Jose, CA
From: paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett) 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Painting strategies?
Date: 19 Nov 92 20:42:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: PCS-BBS - San Jose, CA - 408-270-4085
Reply-To: paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett) 

TO: masys@nlm.nih.gov (Dr. Daniel R. Masys)


    >>In any case, I advise everyone to apply exhaust ventilation _first_ and
    >>respiratory protection _second_ - and understand how to do the
    >>respiratory protection properly.
    >>
    >This explains why the DuPont Imron rep who gave a tent talk at Oshkosh
    >spent almost the entire time talking about the positive pressure mask
    >ventilation requirements for handling the stuff, and almost nothing
    >about how to actually select or apply it.  His sole message was something
    >like "this is an industrial product.  DuPont doesn't want to sell it to
    >anybody under any circumstance, if they don't practice industrial safety."

He was covering his corporate hindparts - and he's right.  I hope he
emphasized that the air inlet for a hose-type pressure mask system
_must_ be in a known-to-be-uncontaminated area - you don't want to
recycle contaminated air back into the painter's breathing zone.
---
 . QMPro 1.0 41-8688 . ...from San Jose, CA
From: Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Painting strategies?
Date: 23 Nov 92 13:33:29 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <316.148.uupcb@pcs.sj.ca.us>
paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett)  writes:

> Did you notice any zinc
> chromate in non-spray containers?

The fella behind the counter told me he couldn't sell Zinc Chromate
primer to me in spray cans, but said he had it available in pint, quart
and gallon containers.  Is it your understanding that Zinc Chromate has
been banned like DDT?  That it should not be available anywhere?  If
so, what is the recommended primer for steel these days.  Maybe I
should consider getting rid of the 3/4's or so gallon of the stuff I
still have in my shop.  I had intended to use it soon while painting
some of the bracketts I've been making for my Christavia, but after
reading the past postings on this thread, I'm not so sure I want to
subject myself to so toxic an environement.  It's winter up here and
the logistics of setting up proper ventalation flow and keeping the
heat up where the paint works best are problematic. 

I for one, very much appreciate the information that gets posted in
this newsgroup.  This last flurry of postings has definately alerted me
to the dangers of Zinc Chromate of which I was not sufficiently aware. 
I was using a mask while painting before, but it's obvious I wasn't
going far enough.  Thank you all for your postings, especially Paul and
Steve.

Corky Scott
From: Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Prop-speed reduction units and torsional vibration
Date: 16 Nov 92 21:22:43 GMT
 <1992Nov16.170527.9396@selway.umt.edu>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <1992Nov16.170527.9396@selway.umt.edu>
cap@selway.umt.edu (Charles A. Smith) writes:

> This subject is rather involved, and rather than hold forth at greater
> length, I'll simply say that in some specific situation, the clutch-spring
> solution may work quite well.

This system did work for Ross Aero.  As I mentioned, they flew their
Mooney with it for several years.  What I worry about is the
possibility of using a different prop with a different weight and
negating the tests or putting the combination into the unknown.

What is a torsional coupling and how does it work?

Thanks for the info.

Corky Scott
From: spenny@sw.stratus.com (Steve Pennypacker)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Gross Wt. of a homebuilt
Date: 18 Nov 92 16:28:40 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: wiley.ts.stratus.com

In article <20070002@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com>, pauls@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Paul Stafford) writes:
> 
>  I did the same thing on my RV4- the design gross is 1500, I put 1600#. Like
>  lester, the FAA didn't even look at it. When you consider that the FAA regs
>  allow planes in Alaska to operate routinely ( no paperwork) at 10% over
>  design gross weight, you've got to think it doesn't matter too much,
>  as long as you are reasonable. consider also that you can operate any airplane

The bit about Alaska is true, but remember that they're (typically) operating
at very low density altitudes due to the cold temperatures.  So they're 
getting significantly better performance out of their airplanes.

I know, this doesn't consider structural loads, and it seems odd that the FAA
would approve a blanket gross weight increase without considering structural
effects.  An airplane which meets Normal category certification loads at 
gross may not meet those standards at gross+10%.  Does anyone know why the 
FAA allows this (not that I'm against it, I'm just curious)?

-- 
     Steve Pennypacker		     PP-ASEL

     spenny@wiley.ts.stratus.com     Stephen_Pennypacker@vos.stratus.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: ST402421@brownvm.brown.edu (Chris Paine)
Subject: Re: Plasma torch
Organization: Brown University
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:27:45 GMT


I've handled a plasma torch a little.  It uses an electrical discharge to
heat a gas (usually argon, but dry air would probably work) to above the
ionization temperature; thus, the name plasma torch.  The gas pressure
blows the slag away.  The one I used did not "turn on" instantaneously;
I don't think I could have made clean holes with it.  Interesting tool,
though, if you want to cut 1/2" thick stainless plate.
                                                      CP




































Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: ginsberg@t.Stanford.EDU (Matthew L. Ginsberg)
Subject: Re: Flying homebuilts outside USA.
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:33:53 GMT


I guess my previous posting must haven't been clear enough.

Folks, I HAVE FLOWN AN EXPERIMENTAL PLANE IN CANADA, AND I KNOW WHAT'S
INVOLVED.  This isn't random speculation:

In order to do it, you have to get a special airworthiness certificate
from the Canadians.  They were very cooperative about giving me one; my
recollection is that I fax'ed them my US certificate and they fax'ed
back a Canadian document.  It said I could operate my Eagle between
(say) 4/1 and 4/6, to and from Toronto and in the vicinity of Toronto.
Not a permit for blanket operations, but they were happy to approve
whatever I predicted I would want to do.

The whole thing involved little more than a few phone calls, and I was
set.

						Matt Ginsberg
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: "Eldo Hildebrand, UNB,Fredericton,NB" <ELDO@UNB.CA>
Subject: Re: Flying homebuilts outside USA.
Organization: The University of New Brunswick
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 12:28:32 GMT

>In article <1992Nov18.161346.19885@cbnews.cb.att.com>, tel@cbnews.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lester) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov17.115817@xerox.com> spencer.wbst129@xerox.com (A ndrew Spencer) writes:
|> >
|> >If I were to build say, a Lancair, could I fly it in Canada or Mexi co?
|> >
|>     No!  The US experimental registration is restricted to US air sp ace.
|> --
|>  -----------------------------------------------------------------
|>  Tom Lester    att!cblph!tel
|>  Sonerai IIL (under TEST)  (614) 860-3259
|>  N4LX      (614) 927-8106

I know that Canadian homebuilts may be flown in the USA with a
special (easily obtained) permit for 90 days ( this is the same
length of time a Canadian is legally allowed to enter the USA
without special permits etc.).  It is my understanding that a
reciprical arrangement exists for USA homebuilts in Canada.  Since
the experimental category does not have a C of A, I don't believe
there is any international agreement that requires any country to
give blanket approval to homebuilts from outside its borders.  You
would have to check with your destination country before planning
your trip to be sure of any special permits or restrictions.  At one
time our rules for entering the USA from Canada required a "direct"
flight to a specific aircraft related event and a "direct" return.
You can use your imagination to determine how direct some of those
flights may have been.

Eldo Hildebrand (ELDO@UNB.CA)
University of New Brunswick
P.O. Box 4400
Fredericton,N.B. E3B 5A3
Tel. 506 453 4521
Fax  506 453 3568

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: umpistun@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Brent Pistun)
Subject: Re: Homebuilt IFR in Canada
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 22:08:07 GMT

In article <Bxz2rw.54D@vcd.hp.com> schinner@vcd.hp.com (Jim Schinnerer) writes:
>So, now that we know we can fly our homebuilts in Canada, can fly them
>IFR?
>
>---------------------------------------------------------
>Jim Schinnerer  -  PP-ASEL-IA       |  Hewlett Packard
>Mooney - 350X  -  "Buster"          |  Vancouver, WA

    Flying homebuilts IFR in Canada is still illegal...  I would imagine
that should be changing in the next little while...


-- 
Brent E. Pistun                                       Computer Engineering
umpistun@CCU.UManitoba.CA                           University of Manitoba
From: collier@akro.austin.ibm.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Gross Wt. of a homebuilt
Date: 20 Nov 92 22:35:06 GMT
Reply-To: collier@austin.vnet.ibm.com
Organization: AIX Technical Support - Austin

> Subject: Re: Gross Wt. of a homebuilt
> 
>In article <BxoIq5.3G0@vcd.hp.com> schinner@vcd.hp.com (Jim Schinnerer)
writes:
>Say I want to build an RV-6.  The specs say that it has a gross weight of
>1600lbs.  By the time I get all my radios and fuel and people in the plane,
>the whole mess weighs 1650lbs.  Can I, as the builder/manufacturer, increase
>the legal gross weight to 1650?  Would I have to do some flight testing
>to verify the new number?  For that matter, what sets the gross weight number?
>
Since there are not any certification specifications defined in the FARs
for the experimental classification, you can use any gross weight that
you want. However, there are certain physical realities that should be
considered (as mentioned in other responses) like performance, CG, etc.
Probably the least understood by the builders is the relationship
between the load limits and the GW. If you increase the GW, you must
reduce the load limits by the same amount. In a simple case if you 
double the GW you need to halve the load limits i.e. if the design load
limit is +6-3 at GW then they must be reduced to +3-1.5 at 2GW.



John Collier                    Voice:  512-838-4675 or t/l 678-4675
IBM AWD-Austin/2830             Fax:    512-838-4851 or t/l 678-4851 
collier@austin.vnet.ibm.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: tel@cbnews.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lester)
Subject: Re: Painting strategies?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:46:21 GMT

In article <289.148.uupcb@pcs.sj.ca.us> paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett) writes:
>TO: tel@cbnews.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lester)
>
> >>My partner and I are far enough along with our Kitfox IV to start
> >>thinking about how we're going to paint her.
>
>T>      I would suggest that you take it up through primer by yourself.
>
>Does anybody ever consider the weight of paint reducing the payload of
>the plane?  I know it's not much <G>, but you could probably get a few
>pounds of paint on a small plane, couldn't you?

	I doubt if you could get it that low.  The Stits process and
    fabric claims to save about 30 lb.s weight over a typical
    ceconite covering. I think the total weight of paint on a fabric plane
    is over thirty lb.s (average sized champ or cub or similar)

    Some all metal aircraft are not painted for that reason. They just
    maintain a polished aluminum exterior.
-- 
	-----------------------------------------------------------------
	Tom Lester				att!cblph!tel
	Sonerai IIL (under TEST)		(614) 860-3259
	N4LX 					(614) 927-8106
From: tel@cbnews.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lester)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Painting strategies?
Date: 18 Nov 92 16:11:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnews.1992Nov18.161135.19666
Organization: AT&T

In article <9211172124.AA02943@etec.com> stivers@etec.com (Robert Stivers) writes:
>My partner and I are far enough along with our Kitfox IV to start
>thinking about how we're going to paint her. With no experience, is it 
>too difficult to do ourselves? How much do the pros cost?
> 
>Any suggestions are appreciated.
>

	I would suggest that you take it up through primer by yourself.
	Then find someone to shoot the final color for you. It depends on
	what system you are using and how good you want the final 
	appearance to be.

	I used Stitts poly tone.  The first layers is brushed on
	(poly brush) then a sprayed layer of poly brush, then the silver
	coats until you get opaque.  The silver is very easily sanded and so 
	runs can be removed.  But be extremely careful of seams and
	over bearing surfaces.  You can sand through the fabric very
	quickly. 

	I started to spray the final color.  My neighbor has a spray
	booth in his back garage for a body shop.  He watched me for 
	about 3 seconds and said "Why don't you let me do it"
	in his most polite voice.  I quickly agreed.  It is a skill
	that is not easily aquired in a single lesson.
	I did the layout work and masking.  He actually shot the color.

	My neighbor charged $100 for use of the heated spray booth 
	for about a month plus all the masking paper, tape, filters, etc.
	I bought some supplies to replenish his stock.
	
	Don't scoff at the masking material.  I was astonished at
	the amount of material used for masking a minor three color
	trim job.
	
	Also, be SURE you use professional quality tapes and masking paper.
	Do NOT use newsprint for masking and do NOT use hardware store
	masking tape. There is a tape called fineline.  Use it
	exclusively for masking edges. It is expensive, but you don't
	get the fuzy sawtooth borders that masking tape gives.
	And it is easy to bend around curves.  It comes in different
	widths from 1/8" up to 1".  1/2" is good for mostly straight lines.
	1/4 inch is good for large radius turns (>3" radius)
	1/8 inch is only good for sharp curves and creating pin stripes.
	Use painters quality masking tape for holding the masking paper 
	in place.
	
-- 
	-----------------------------------------------------------------
	Tom Lester				att!cblph!tel
	Sonerai IIL (under TEST)		(614) 860-3259
	N4LX 					(614) 927-8106
From: Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Painting strategies?
Date: 20 Nov 92 13:11:09 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <311.148.uupcb@pcs.sj.ca.us>
paul.burnett@pcs.sj.ca.us (Paul Burnett) writes:

> TO: Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
> 
> CKS>>>Nitrate Lacquers (don't think anyone makes these anymore...)
> 
> Wanna bet?  <G>  The cheap spray cans of paint at the local hardware
> store are nitrocellulose-based lacquer.

This is just a point of information about the above attibution, I
didn't post the information Paul is attributing to me, I was asked to
post it by Steve Cornelius if I thought it was important enough and I
do.  This isn't intended as a flame to Paul, just a correction as to
who posted what.  Personally, I don't feel expert enough to comment on
the subject but I do feel concerned enough to pay VERY close attention
to what has been said.  

In an interesting aside, I tried to buy some Zinc Chromate primer in
spray cans at the local body shop supply jobber recently and found it
was no longer available in that form.  The reason I was given was that
it was considered too dangerous (probably by the government) to be sold
to non professionals.  That the non professionals were not taking the
necessary steps to protect themselves and others from the vapors. 
However, the place did sell individual pressurised bottles that could
be loaded with paint and used just exactly like spray cans.  So the
danger is still there for the casual user.

Corky Scott