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

Aileron balance
Goto page Previous 1, 2

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

amyvega2005(at)earthlink.
Guest

Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 3:30 pm Post subject: Aileron balance

should have put the self cleaning ass wiper option, only avaialble on the QBK.  good deal for $399.99.



--

jmaynard

Joined: 27 Feb 2008
Posts: 394
Location: Fairmont, MN (FRM)

Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 3:32 pm Post subject: Aileron balance

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 06:52:03PM -0400, Juan Vega wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   you are assuming the accident was from Flutter,  no one has said any of

 the accidents were flutter, just speculation from a bunch of builders at

 this point.


	


I'm making no assumptions other than, at this point, flutter is a possible

explanation for the crash. If it's not, that's fine, but why isn't it?



 	  Quote: 	
		   Flutter should not be an issue at all when flown at cruise speed.  I have

 my cables tensioned according to plans, and I believe you are all barking

 up the wrong tree.


	


I'm going to assume that that will be true of my aircraft when I take

delivery, as well; it's not reasonable to expect that AMD would screw up

somthing that's that vital. Is that enough to guarantee that flutter will

not be an issue? The folks at AMD have tested the aircraft through a

complete Part 23 flight test program, which includes dives to Vne; is that

enough to demonstrate that there will be no flutter?



If that's the case, how can we explain the neatly missing aileron on the

Yuba City aircraft?



 	  Quote: 	
		   Some guy that saw tin canning and misstook it for flutter does not make

 for a reason to speculate the flutter was a cuase of the accident.  It may

 have been if the guys flying it 1- never retensioned their cables and 2-

 flew past reasonable parrameters.


	


I'm not aware of someone that mistook tin canning for flutter. What I recall

started that discussion was the picture of the wing with the aileron not

attached, no rivets present, and no skin torn. How could that happen?



 	  Quote: 	
		   I am done on this whole issue.  You guys need to focus on having fun

 building your planes again, if that is what you guys in this site are

 really doing.


	


I'm not so patiently awaiting AMD to finish building mine. Wen I take

delivery, I'm going to put at least 20 (and probably more, the way my plans

have changed) hours on it in the first week or two. I wouldn't do that if I

thought it was going to kill me. Even so, I think I, and everyone here, is

entitled to understand the problem - whatever it may be - and what it would

take to fix it.

-- 

Jay Maynard, K5ZC                   http://www.conmicro.com

http://jmaynard.livejournal.com      http://www.tronguy.net

Fairmont, MN (FRM)                        (Yes, that's me!)

AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

_________________
Jay Maynard, K5ZC
AMD Zodiac XLi N55ZC

William Dominguez

Joined: 09 Apr 2008
Posts: 118

Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 5:25 pm Post subject: Re: Aileron balance

I goes both ways, just because some of you say there's nothing wrong doesn't make it so. The thing is, nobody know what caused 5 XLs to fold or break a wing in mid flight. Some people suspect the design, others are convinced of pilot error or something unrelated to the design. But the problem we are having here is, those who are convinced in nothing wrong with the design are getting frustrated and angry because they cannot impose their position to those who disagree.  

I believe in the possibility that there's nothing wrong, but so far, I'm not convinced. Before you ask me why I'm still building an airplane that might have a design issue I'll give you my answer, I'm confident that this issue, whatever it is, will eventually be resolved.

If as you say you are getting tired of this posts, you have 2 options; ignore the posts or suggest the poster to go the ZBAG yahoo group and continue there. I wont recommend to leave this list since there still lots of good information here in other threads.

I'm William and I approve this message.

William Dominguez

yada yada 601XL... plans..

you know the rest

 	  Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote: 	
		  Bill,

Just because it is mentioned on this forum doesn't give it any more validity than "as seen on TV." Exactly what are "the indications that suggest that there might be a flutter problem with the XL"?  Is it because someone on the forum said so?  Is it because Brito's airplane (NOT an XL) had a flutter problem? 

I'm afraid that too many are giving credence to, supporting and taking for granted some of the things said on the forum that have absolutely no basis in fact: speculation, guess, extrapolation, armchair engineering and outright scare mongering.  

I'm certainly not opposed to the sharing of ideas and real knowledge, but I'm really getting tired of the spurious scuttlebutt that is being passed off as valid information.

Jay in Dallas

Do not archive

"William Dominguez" <bill_dom> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

I know you are asking Andy but I'll try for a second time to answer your question since I didn't do a very good job the first time.

There isn't a hard, smoking gun type of evidence of flutter. But there are indications that suggest there might be a flutter problem with the XL. I won't get at what those indications are, they have been mentioned in many posts in this list. Should there be a hard evidence of flutter before we implement any change to our wings? absolutely. But in the meanwhile some of us would like to see how the ailerons are balanced, just in case the evidence come and we need to do that in the future. After all, is good learning. If you are the type of person who don't like to talk about thing that might or might not be needed in the future, that is fine. But not everyone is the same. 

William Dominguez

Zodiac 601XL Plans

Miami Florida

http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom

Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:

> Andy,

> 

> Where is the evidence that ANY of this is needed?

> 

> Jay in Dallas

> Do not archive

> 

> 

> "ashontz"  wrote:

> 

> 

> > 

> > 

> > 1) to apparently tune out an resonant frequencies that could allow for flutter.

> > 

> > 2) when the plane bounces due to turbulence, the non-balanced weight aft of the hinge will flop up and down, possibily inducing flutter. If it's balanced, the entire aileron including the balance, moves up or down in unison, not around the pivot.

> > 

> > 

> > Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:

> > > OK, I guess I missed something.  With all this e-talk about how to balance the ailerons, there has got to be a good reason one would want to balance the ailerons.  Just what is that reason?  Not speculation, not a guess, not conjecture; a REASON. PLEASE!

> > > 

> > > Jay in Dallas

> > 

> > 

> > --------

> > Andy Shontz

> > 

> > do not archive

> > 

> > CH601XL - Corvair

> > www.mykitlog.com/ashontz

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > Read this topic online here:

> > 

> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=183162#183162

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> 

--------

William Dominguez

Zodiac 601XL Plans

Miami Florida

http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom

Read this topic online here:

http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=183178#183178

William Dominguez

Joined: 09 Apr 2008
Posts: 118

Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 6:02 pm Post subject: Re: Aileron balance

Correction, 

I made a typo and before anybody start making fun. I don't go both ways, I meant to say "It goes both ways.." in the beginning of the first paragraph.

 	  William Dominguez wrote: 	
		  I goes both ways, just because some of you say there's nothing wrong doesn't make it so. The thing is, nobody know what caused 5 XLs to fold or break a wing in mid flight. Some people suspect the design, others are convinced of pilot error or something unrelated to the design. But the problem we are having here is, those who are convinced in nothing wrong with the design are getting frustrated and angry because they cannot impose their position to those who disagree.  

I believe in the possibility that there's nothing wrong, but so far, I'm not convinced. Before you ask me why I'm still building an airplane that might have a design issue I'll give you my answer, I'm confident that this issue, whatever it is, will eventually be resolved.

If as you say you are getting tired of this posts, you have 2 options; ignore the posts or suggest the poster to go the ZBAG yahoo group and continue there. I wont recommend to leave this list since there still lots of good information here in other threads.

I'm William and I approve this message.

William Dominguez

yada yada 601XL... plans..

you know the rest

 	  Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote: 	
		  Bill,

Just because it is mentioned on this forum doesn't give it any more validity than "as seen on TV." Exactly what are "the indications that suggest that there might be a flutter problem with the XL"?  Is it because someone on the forum said so?  Is it because Brito's airplane (NOT an XL) had a flutter problem? 

I'm afraid that too many are giving credence to, supporting and taking for granted some of the things said on the forum that have absolutely no basis in fact: speculation, guess, extrapolation, armchair engineering and outright scare mongering.  

I'm certainly not opposed to the sharing of ideas and real knowledge, but I'm really getting tired of the spurious scuttlebutt that is being passed off as valid information.

Jay in Dallas

Do not archive

"William Dominguez" <bill_dom> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

I know you are asking Andy but I'll try for a second time to answer your question since I didn't do a very good job the first time.

There isn't a hard, smoking gun type of evidence of flutter. But there are indications that suggest there might be a flutter problem with the XL. I won't get at what those indications are, they have been mentioned in many posts in this list. Should there be a hard evidence of flutter before we implement any change to our wings? absolutely. But in the meanwhile some of us would like to see how the ailerons are balanced, just in case the evidence come and we need to do that in the future. After all, is good learning. If you are the type of person who don't like to talk about thing that might or might not be needed in the future, that is fine. But not everyone is the same. 

William Dominguez

Zodiac 601XL Plans

Miami Florida

http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom

Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:

> Andy,

> 

> Where is the evidence that ANY of this is needed?

> 

> Jay in Dallas

> Do not archive

> 

> 

> "ashontz"  wrote:

> 

> 

> > 

> > 

> > 1) to apparently tune out an resonant frequencies that could allow for flutter.

> > 

> > 2) when the plane bounces due to turbulence, the non-balanced weight aft of the hinge will flop up and down, possibily inducing flutter. If it's balanced, the entire aileron including the balance, moves up or down in unison, not around the pivot.

> > 

> > 

> > Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:

> > > OK, I guess I missed something.  With all this e-talk about how to balance the ailerons, there has got to be a good reason one would want to balance the ailerons.  Just what is that reason?  Not speculation, not a guess, not conjecture; a REASON. PLEASE!

> > > 

> > > Jay in Dallas

> > 

> > 

> > --------

> > Andy Shontz

> > 

> > do not archive

> > 

> > CH601XL - Corvair

> > www.mykitlog.com/ashontz

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > Read this topic online here:

> > 

> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=183162#183162

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> 

--------

William Dominguez

Zodiac 601XL Plans

Miami Florida

http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom

Read this topic online here:

http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=183178#183178

_________________
William Dominguez
Zodiac 601XL Plans
Miami Florida
http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom

ernieth(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 3:41 am Post subject: Aileron balance

Not sure which accidents you are talking about.  

 I think one,  a bolt was left out of the rear mount point or fell out.

 One the UK sited the pilot for pulling up so hard as to removing the wing with excessive G forces.

  and could not determine if it was not related to other times in which he was sited for buzzing people.

 One Flew into thunder storms.... Says it all, ok we will never really know.

 Enjoy the build, make your changes, I hope it works out for you.

  I will be using no hinges on the aileron,  no extra weight at the wing tip.

E.

 Do not archive.

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 6:25 PM, William Dominguez <bill_dom(at)yahoo.com (bill_dom(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:

 [quote]--> Zenith-List message posted by: "William Dominguez" <bill_dom(at)yahoo.com (bill_dom(at)yahoo.com)>

 I goes both ways, just because some of you say there's nothing wrong doesn't make it so. The thing is, nobody know what caused 5 XLs to fold or break a wing in mid flight. Some people suspect the design, others are convinced of pilot error or something unrelated to the design. But the problem we are having here is, those who are convinced in nothing wrong with the design are getting frustrated and angry because they cannot impose their position to those who disagree.

 I believe in the possibility that there's nothing wrong, but so far, I'm not convinced. Before you ask me why I'm still building an airplane that might have a design issue I'll give you my answer, I'm confident that this issue, whatever it is, will eventually be resolved.

 If as you say you are getting tired of this posts, you have 2 options; ignore the posts or suggest the poster to go the ZBAG yahoo group and continue there. I wont recommend to leave this list since there still lots of good information here in other threads.

 I'm William and I approve this message.

 William Dominguez

 yada yada 601XL... plans..

 you know the rest

 Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:

 > Bill,

 >

 > Just because it is mentioned on this forum doesn't give it any more validity than "as seen on TV." Exactly what are "the indications that suggest that there might be a flutter problem with the XL"?  Is it because someone on the forum said so?  Is it because Brito's airplane (NOT an XL) had a flutter problem?

  >

 > I'm afraid that too many are giving credence to, supporting and taking for granted some of the things said on the forum that have absolutely no basis in fact: speculation, guess, extrapolation, armchair engineering and outright scare mongering.

  >

 > I'm certainly not opposed to the sharing of ideas and real knowledge, but I'm really getting tired of the spurious scuttlebutt that is being passed off as valid information.

 >

 > Jay in Dallas

 > Do not archive

 >

 >

 >

 > "William Dominguez"  wrote:

 >

 >

 > >

 > >

 > > I know you are asking Andy but I'll try for a second time to answer your question since I didn't do a very good job the first time.

 > >

 > > There isn't a hard, smoking gun type of evidence of flutter. But there are indications that suggest there might be a flutter problem with the XL. I won't get at what those indications are, they have been mentioned in many posts in this list. Should there be a hard evidence of flutter before we implement any change to our wings? absolutely. But in the meanwhile some of us would like to see how the ailerons are balanced, just in case the evidence come and we need to do that in the future. After all, is good learning. If you are the type of person who don't like to talk about thing that might or might not be needed in the future, that is fine. But not everyone is the same.

  > >

 > > William Dominguez

 > > Zodiac 601XL Plans

 > > Miami Florida

 > > http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > > Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:

 > > > Andy,

 > > >

 > > > Where is the evidence that ANY of this is needed?

 > > >

 > > > Jay in Dallas

 > > > Do not archive

 > > >

 > > >

 > > > "ashontz"  wrote:

 > > >

 > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > > 1) to apparently tune out an resonant frequencies that could allow for flutter.

 > > > >

 > > > > 2) when the plane bounces due to turbulence, the non-balanced weight aft of the hinge will flop up and down, possibily inducing flutter. If it's balanced, the entire aileron including the balance, moves up or down in unison, not around the pivot.

  > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > > Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:

 > > > > > OK, I guess I missed something.  With all this e-talk about how to balance the ailerons, there has got to be a good reason one would want to balance the ailerons.  Just what is that reason?  Not speculation, not a guess, not conjecture; a REASON. PLEASE!

  > > > > >

 > > > > > Jay in Dallas

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > > --------

 > > > > Andy Shontz

 > > > >

 > > > > do not archive

 > > > >

 > > > > CH601XL - Corvair

 > > > > www.mykitlog.com/ashontz

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > > Read this topic online here:

 > > > >

 > > > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=183162#183162

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > > >

 > > >

 > >

 > >

 > > --------

 > > William Dominguez

 > > Zodiac 601XL Plans

 > > Miami Florida

 > > http://www.geocities.com/bill_dom

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > > Read this topic online here:

 > >

 > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=183178#183178

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > >

 >

 Read this topic online here:

 http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=183220#183220

 [b]

Yak52(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 3:50 am Post subject: Aileron balance

Working from a good set of plans helps resolve the  dilemma. The designer will have already investigated and eliminated the problem  in the construction and subsequent flight test evaluations of the prototype "   

 While you are pondering this statement from the EAA article, and the  further statement that many airplanes do not have balanced control surfaces-  please also consider how you are going to evaluate the torsional effects of  placing these weights on one end of the aileron- i.e. the twist that will be  placed on the aileron at speed; and whether or not the end ribs in the aileron  will withstand those stresses as they were clearly not designed to handle either  or both of them in this airpalne.





Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food.

  [quote][b]

ashontz

Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 723

Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 6:29 am Post subject: Re: Aileron balance

There is no evidence, til you test each and every plane individually for flutter.  An agreed upon way per the EAA (Tony Bingelis) to minimize the chance of flutter is to at least statically balance your ailerons 100%.

Even so, seems the real cause of flutter is any play in the controls. Personally, I'm liking the push-pull tube idea rather than a cable system. I've never liked the idea of cables, just seems to complicated. To many potential trouble areas which could lead to slack. Push-pull tubes seem to deal with this issue well. Read Tony Bingelis' article on push-pull tube controls. It's pretty good. He makes good points for them too, and considering all the supporting accessories to make a cable system work, push-pull tubes are even competitive by weight.

 	  Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote: 	
		  Andy,

Where is the evidence that ANY of this is needed?

Jay in Dallas

Do not archive

"ashontz" <ashontz> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	

1) to apparently tune out an resonant frequencies that could allow for flutter.

2) when the plane bounces due to turbulence, the non-balanced weight aft of the hinge will flop up and down, possibily inducing flutter. If it's balanced, the entire aileron including the balance, moves up or down in unison, not around the pivot.

Jaybannist(at)cs.com wrote:

> OK, I guess I missed something.  With all this e-talk about how to balance the ailerons, there has got to be a good reason one would want to balance the ailerons.  Just what is that reason?  Not speculation, not a guess, not conjecture; a REASON. PLEASE!

> 

> Jay in Dallas

--------

Andy Shontz

do not archive

CH601XL - Corvair

www.mykitlog.com/ashontz

Read this topic online here:

http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=183162#183162

Last edited by ashontz on Sun May 18, 2008 6:43 am; edited 1 time in total

ashontz

Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 723

Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 6:34 am Post subject: Re: Aileron balance

The folks at AMD have tested the aircraft through a 

complete Part 23 flight test program, which includes dives to Vne; is that 

enough to demonstrate that there will be no flutter? 



Exactly, flutter issues are on a plane by plane basis. Apparently that perticular installation, brnad new, with everything tight as a drum did not experience flutter. It's not a design thing, it's all the other factors that go into possibly leading to flutter. Every plane from the same set of plans is different, because all planes are handmade, or at least hand assembled.



 	  jmaynard wrote: 	
		  On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 06:52:03PM -0400, Juan Vega wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   you are assuming the accident was from Flutter,  no one has said any of

 the accidents were flutter, just speculation from a bunch of builders at

 this point.



	


I'm making no assumptions other than, at this point, flutter is a possible

explanation for the crash. If it's not, that's fine, but why isn't it?



 	  Quote: 	
		   Flutter should not be an issue at all when flown at cruise speed.  I have

 my cables tensioned according to plans, and I believe you are all barking

 up the wrong tree.



	


I'm going to assume that that will be true of my aircraft when I take

delivery, as well; it's not reasonable to expect that AMD would screw up

somthing that's that vital. Is that enough to guarantee that flutter will

not be an issue? The folks at AMD have tested the aircraft through a

complete Part 23 flight test program, which includes dives to Vne; is that

enough to demonstrate that there will be no flutter?



If that's the case, how can we explain the neatly missing aileron on the

Yuba City aircraft?



 	  Quote: 	
		   Some guy that saw tin canning and misstook it for flutter does not make

 for a reason to speculate the flutter was a cuase of the accident.  It may

 have been if the guys flying it 1- never retensioned their cables and 2-

 flew past reasonable parrameters.



	


I'm not aware of someone that mistook tin canning for flutter. What I recall

started that discussion was the picture of the wing with the aileron not

attached, no rivets present, and no skin torn. How could that happen?



 	  Quote: 	
		   I am done on this whole issue.  You guys need to focus on having fun

 building your planes again, if that is what you guys in this site are

 really doing.



	


I'm not so patiently awaiting AMD to finish building mine. Wen I take

delivery, I'm going to put at least 20 (and probably more, the way my plans

have changed) hours on it in the first week or two. I wouldn't do that if I

thought it was going to kill me. Even so, I think I, and everyone here, is

entitled to understand the problem - whatever it may be - and what it would

take to fix it.

-- 

Jay Maynard, K5ZC                   http://www.conmicro.com

http://jmaynard.livejournal.com      http://www.tronguy.net

Fairmont, MN (FRM)                        (Yes, that's me!)

AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

planes_by_ken(at)bellsout
Guest

Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 4:04 pm Post subject: Aileron balance

DC-9 used cables for the elevator and ailerons.  "DC" = direct cable  

Ken

do not archive



Juan Vega wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		    No, cables are not a primative way to move or tension the ailerons, check most high performance turbine aircraft like the TBM or C-90, they use cables.  they just need to be built correctly.



 Juan

planes_by_ken(at)bellsout
Guest

Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 4:05 pm Post subject: Aileron Balance

That looks just like the aileron balance on the Piper Cherokee series

 

 do not archive

 

 Roberto Brito wrote: [quote]               

Hi everybody,   

    

Here is the You Tube Video about my aileron balance.   

This is only a way for doing this, there are of course, other ways, for example.   

I'll post some pictures to you all that need them.   

Please do not do this in your plane before talking to your Aeronautical Engineer or other authority about it.   

I don’t want to state hereby that it is the solution to the problem on our Zodiacs, if any, because I’m not an aeronautical engineer.   

Well, when my Zodiac entered a little turbulence, the ailerons shook a little and after towards I had the balance performed, it enters and nothing happens, it became much better, more comfortable.   

I hope that all Zodiac Owners can solve this problem, if any.   

All of us know that Zodiac is a good plane, that it has a good reputation, but it must do away with the crashes.    

To end up, I have a lot of respect regarding Heintz’s family and I’m confident that should the Zodiac have any problem they will solve it.   

    

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_D4bt0guvM   

    

Roberto Brito.   

Brasil.   

    

Zodiac XL 601 w/ 190hrs   

Jabiru 3300   

Enigma    

 [b]

yak52

Joined: 25 Oct 2007
Posts: 50

Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 7:07 am Post subject: Aileron Balance

Please consider the effect of torsional stress on the aileron caused by placing a weighted arm on one end of the aileron. Also consider that the  skin and end ribs were not designed for the placement of such weights causing such stress in either static or dynamic conditions. Lastly, the primary purpose of utilizing plans drawn by a design professional and contstruction using generally approved methods is so that you have the same product at the end of the construction process; therefore alleviating the status of test pilot for every builder to the greatest extent possible.    [quote][b]

n85ae

Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 403

Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 9:04 am Post subject: Re: Aileron balance

The design rule for this for mass balanced ailerons is I believe +/- 24G

and +/-12G fore and aft. So figure out the combined weight, do the math,

and then work out the rivets and the structure.



Mass balancing ailerons certainly won't hurt, unless you fubar the structure.

You may find some change in control pressure. It is a pretty standard

design practice to do it, and even my lowly Kitfox has mass balances 

on it.



I'm not an Aero engineer, but Dad has a PhD in it, so his mutterings 

occasionally stick with me.



Regards,

Jeff

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2

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 can download files in this forum