Texas Parasol

On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 11:25:05 -0500, cavelamb himself
wrote:

Stealth Pilot wrote:
On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 16:52:03 -0500, cavelamb himself
wrote:


wrote:


To All:

I have recovered some of the files containing the corrections to the
FUSELAGE errors in the Texas Parasol drawings, originally posted in
Feb 2003 but since erased. Also found were portions of the tutorial
on extruded angle and its use for this type of structure.

If you've any interest in this data please provide a publicly
accessible space where the material may be posted. Some of the
drawings are in .jpg format, others are in DeltaCAD. So far, I've not
found any of the text files.

-R.S.Hoover



Taking someone else's work, making changes, and calling it you own.



he called it the Texas Parasol and noted the information as
corrections to errors in the original plans.
he hasnt made any attribution of source.

I cant understand your attitude. Dont you realise that there were
changes needed?



Needed?

Or wanted?

That's my problem with this whole affair.

These "improvements" have never been built (so you don't really know if
it will go together that way or not),
nor tested.

YOU BOTH have made really disparaging statements about the airplane not
being safe because you don't approve od some of the details.

Like the cabane bolts being loaded in tension.
I questioned it too - until I realized how lightly loaded they are.
And how many there are.

You don't like the wing strut fitting attachment.
Granted.
But it has never failed. Not even once.

If one had ever failed, we would have changed the thing years ago.
Before you ever even heard of it.

Bottom line on modifications is this:

If you want to change it, build it that way yourself.
THEN, if it works out ok, THEN publish the mods.



My attitude is simply, If it works, it works.

ANd Richard's own personal plane was NOT built to his published specs.
By his own admission.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote:


ANd Richard's own personal plane was NOT built to his published specs.
By his own admission.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **



Which one?


--

Richard

(remove the X to email)

cavelamb himself wrote:
clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote:



ANd Richard's own personal plane was NOT built to his published specs.
By his own admission.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **




Which one?



Or should I ask which oneS.

Because no two have been exactly alike.



--

Richard

(remove the X to email)

On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 11:25:05 -0500, cavelamb himself
wrote:

Stealth Pilot wrote:
On Sun, 03 Aug 2008 16:52:03 -0500, cavelamb himself
wrote:


wrote:


To All:

I have recovered some of the files containing the corrections to the
FUSELAGE errors in the Texas Parasol drawings, originally posted in
Feb 2003 but since erased. Also found were portions of the tutorial
on extruded angle and its use for this type of structure.

If you've any interest in this data please provide a publicly
accessible space where the material may be posted. Some of the
drawings are in .jpg format, others are in DeltaCAD. So far, I've not
found any of the text files.

-R.S.Hoover



Taking someone else's work, making changes, and calling it you own.



he called it the Texas Parasol and noted the information as
corrections to errors in the original plans.
he hasnt made any attribution of source.

I cant understand your attitude. Dont you realise that there were
changes needed?



Needed?

Or wanted?

That's my problem with this whole affair.

These "improvements" have never been built (so you don't really know if
it will go together that way or not),
nor tested.

YOU BOTH have made really disparaging statements about the airplane not
being safe because you don't approve od some of the details.


not correct. in my case I had an aeroengineer friend of mine look at
the details. his comments were not polite.
as a result of the deficiencies in your design he has been tempted to
publish a similar design backed up by full stress calculations a built
and statically tested to destruction fuselage.
unfortunately he is a very busy boy. he has done the FEA but hasnt
finished building the fuselage.

you should follow Chuck Slusarcik's lead and have a proper stress
analysis done. your spar needs mods.

Stealth Pilot

Stealth Pilot wrote:

Good Bye

On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 23:55:26 -0500, cavelamb himself
wrote:

clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote:


ANd Richard's own personal plane was NOT built to his published specs.
By his own admission.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **



Which one?
I don't know - the last one? Or any? Bring us up to date.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Aug 4, 12:25 pm, cavelamb himself wrote:
...

Taking someone else's work, making changes, and calling it you own.

he called it the Texas Parasol and noted the information as
corrections to errors in the original plans.
he hasnt made any attribution of source.

I cant understand your attitude. Dont you realise that there were
changes needed?

...

Bottom line on modifications is this:

If you want to change it, build it that way yourself.
THEN, if it works out ok, THEN publish the mods.

My attitude is simply, If it works, it works.


Regardless, Mr Hoover advanced no claims to anyone
else's designs.

--

FF

Fred the Red Shirt wrote:


Regardless, Mr Hoover advanced no claims to anyone
else's designs.



Give it up, Fred.

He is making changes to primary structure and claiming they
correct "faults" in the original design.
His suggestions have not been built or tested.
In fact, he has never built and flown ANY airplane.

If he's not putting a claim on it, dunno what is.
Actually, he damned well better put his name on it.
Because it's sure not MY work.

I do NOT recommend these modifications to prospective builders.

All because we violated his cast-in-stone rules of thumb.


--

Richard

(remove the X to email)

What was the resolution of the supposed dimensional discrepency
discussed he

http://www.airtalk.org/next-vt20548....r=asc&start=15

Or has that been addressed over on the Yahoo TP group?

--

FF

Fred the Red Shirt wrote:
What was the resolution of the supposed dimensional discrepency
discussed he

http://www.airtalk.org/next-vt20548....r=asc&start=15

Or has that been addressed over on the Yahoo TP group?

--

FF




Fred,

Do YOU know what he's talking about?