Lifting by engine/Peel Ply

Forums: 

From: by way of Marvin Kaye <marvkaye [at] olsusa.com> <N295VV [at] aol.com>
Subject: Re: Lifting by engine/Peel Ply
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1998 12:21:05 -0500
To: <lancair.list [at] olsusa.com>

         <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>

From:  n295vv [at] aol.com



Rather than lift by the engine lifting rings, I prefer to lift the nose of my

IV by placing a nylon strap around the Prop shaft behind the nose cone.



Since the balance of the IV is not very nose heavy, I have to add some weight

on the top of the engine, usually several cases of oil, just to be safe.



I don't disagree with those who use the  engine rings, for they are only

putting 1G on the gearcase, and the acceleration factor is negligable.  I

prefer my method because it spreads out that one G along the bearing

journals--the same thing that occurs in flight.

 

Now, in regards to the great Peel Ply controversey, I have maintained for

years that Neico is making a mistake by not having it removed in the

Phillipines, where the parts are made.  Heck, for about five dollars in labor

over there, the whole darned plane could be peeled, and the natives would be

happy for the income!



Additionally, we have all heard about the two planes built without the peel

ply being completely removed -- if I were Neico, I would want to completely

eliminate this possibility because of Lawsuit liability.



Further, wouldn't we all pay an extra hundred bucks not to have to go through

this misery?  Neico could make an extra $95 on each plane, and some guy could

feed his family in the Phillipines.  What a deal....



David Jones