LMGA Assembly

[Bruce]

I'm having an issue with the full scale drawings of the 2 X 2 aluminum extrusions on page 9-3 not aligning up correctly? I was having a set made and the metal fabricator called and said the bottoms don't line up. He had me cut out the two sides and put them together like you were going to cut them from the 2 X 2 aluminum angle. In the attached photo I've moved the teardrop over to the left side where it would complete the right angle, looking at the bottom of the image things don't line up. The tear drop seems short or the other side is to long. I'm thinking maybe he and I are doing something wrong, anyone else run into this issue? I'm thinking that it needs to look more like picture #2, in order for the shape of the bottom to come out right. Any thoughts?

 

Thanks,

Bruce Sturgill

[Bruce]

I guess I didn't explain it very well, so I cut the parts out and taped them together and hopefully the picture will explain better than I did. In the yellow circle at the bottom you can see where the ends do not line up correctly. These are from the full scale drawings and I was wondering if any body else had the same issue I'm encountering? I'm going to cut off the extra 1/4" and smooth that bottom corner area.

 

Thanks,

Bruce

[Waiter]

I seem to recall this, but it was a LONG time ago.

 

I made my my brackets also, I can't remember exactly what I did, but its not a big deal, go with either one.

 

Waiter

[Juhl-EZ]

I'm having an issue with the full scale drawings of the 2 X 2 aluminum extrusions on page 9-3.....

Bruce,

 

I don't have the answer to your question - just seems this is the right point in time to ask you if you have considered the "Desired - strongly recommended but not requiring grounding of the aircraft" modification of the extrusion found in Canard Pusher #27 - which sounds:

 

"Move the 3/8" holes in all four extrusions up 0.4". Also modify outlines to maintain original edge distances around the 3/8" hole. This moves the entire main gear up 0.4", resulting in an improved gear-fuselage juncture reducing aerodynamic drag."

 

Henrik

[Bruce]

Bruce,

 

I don't have the answer to your question - just seems this is the right point in time to ask you if you have considered the "Desired - strongly recommended but not requiring grounding of the aircraft" modification of the extrusion found in Canard Pusher #27 - which sounds:

 

"Move the 3/8" holes in all four extrusions up 0.4". Also modify outlines to maintain original edge distances around the 3/8" hole. This moves the entire main gear up 0.4", resulting in an improved gear-fuselage juncture reducing aerodynamic drag."

 

Henrik

Yes, that's already incorporated in the drawing. The 3/8" hole is moved up and the outline is modified to accommodate this, that's why the "tear drop" side looks flat on the top instead of rounded like the original drawings. The picture shows how it'll look (like everybody else's) with the lower portion trimmed off. Just curious if any body else had the same issue with using the plans drawings.

 

Bruce

[IndyCanard]

I attached the way the side view should have been drawn. Ideally you do not want the flange common to the fuselage to be have the lower edge end in the sharp edge as drawn. When I built mine, I made a smooth transition between the lower ends of both flanges. What the paper mock up (and drawing) does not show is the radii of the extrusion. That radii makes the transition fairly easy to do. Hope this helps.

[Big Steve]

Bruce it has been 25 years since I built mine I cut them out by hand with a hack saw. As long as they match each other that shape does not matter that much. I am a weight freak I would take all the humps off and put in a couple of lightening holes. STeve