Texas Parasol

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?

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.

--

Richard

(remove the X to email)

On Aug 4, 11:25*am, 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.

--

Richard

(remove the X to email)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Posting modifications and or corrections to a project that work are
what I thought experimental avaition is all about Richard. Detailed
research of a project of any type before taking it on is something I
have done for many year's. I've written more research paper's and
immplemented more proceeedual policies than I care to recall.

I have no way of knowing if anything is right or wrong with the TP, I
only know that I like it and am doing a detailed study of it to
determine if I want to build one. Reviewing plan's, potential
glitche's and recommendations is a very basic part of who I am. If you
feel this is being critical of you than I am sorry you feel that way,
but it is not the case.

Coming back to avaition on a super tight budget mean's weighing out my
options, doing a detailed cost study and getting things right the
first time. It's a challange to me and I am enjoying myself.

Best regards

Joe

Copperhead144 wrote:

Posting modifications and or corrections to a project that work are
what I thought experimental avaition is all about Richard. Detailed
research of a project of any type before taking it on is something I
have done for many year's. I've written more research paper's and
immplemented more proceeedual policies than I care to recall.

I have no way of knowing if anything is right or wrong with the TP, I
only know that I like it and am doing a detailed study of it to
determine if I want to build one. Reviewing plan's, potential
glitche's and recommendations is a very basic part of who I am. If you
feel this is being critical of you than I am sorry you feel that way,
but it is not the case.

Coming back to avaition on a super tight budget mean's weighing out my
options, doing a detailed cost study and getting things right the
first time. It's a challange to me and I am enjoying myself.

Best regards

Joe

From what you have said here, I understand where you are coming from.
And you are welcome to critique as you see fit.



Just so you know what I amd talking about, please feel free to research
our old history...

http://www.airtalk.org/next-vt20548....r=asc&start=15
I suggest you read the whole thread (about six pages).
If telling the truth is 'bashing' then I'm proud to plead guilty.
-R.S.Hoover


--

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.

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 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 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