Introduction

In October, I inspected and bought a Viking Dragonfly built by Walter Triplett and first flown in 1987. The late, Walter Born bought the plane and it was hangered since 1993. In November, I trailered it to Huntsville AL where I am planning to spend 12 to 18 months rebuilding to make it airworthy again. The critical paperwork starts with the aircraft, engine logs, and pilot's handbook: Aircraft Log (HAPI Engine Log) Pilot's Operating Handbook

N19WT performance measured in 1987 with HAPI 1835cc engine. Comments? Questions? These can be mailed to: bwilson4web@hotmail.com. Past and Current Project Log Earlier, project logs by month: 2012_02 - wing disassembly, navigation lights, and planning; 2012_01 - work table, shed, paper work, and starting wing; 2011_12 - purchase, towing, and work-shed. 2012/02/29 - LED lense and 2-stroke risks The Freshnel lenses arrived and preliminary testing suggests the 10W LED with 2.5" lense may meet the distance requirements for landing lights. I need to build a rapid prototype but it looks promising. An EAA member posted a link to an EAA Webinar on 2-cycle engine failures. Given by the owners Rainbow Aviaton, this FBO has extensive experience with 2-cycle operations. His experience is that 'offloading' the prop load is associated with the greatest risks of 2-cycle failure. In particular, heleocopters are especially sensistive but aircraft with wide speed ranges like the 60-140 mph range of the Dragonfly, are at risk. I need to review his experience and mitigate this risk. It occurred to me that I may need to go test-flight, airport shopping when N19WT is ready to go. The advantage is I can choose an airport optimized for flight testing and do all of the testing there . . . on vacation. Having a wider

range of airports means I'm less subject to local, high-demand, airport management. I simply trailer N19WT to where everyone agrees would be an ideal test flight airport. Then I commute on weekends, holidays and on vacation to fly-off the hours. 2012/02/27 The simple solution to the 110 degree cone is a hemisphere reflector beind the bulb:

A quick, cardboard reflector and some measurements and we'll be ready to 'cut metal.' 2012/02/26 - Connectors, tap-testing and parts order Via eBay 251001426424, a "Wichitech Digitial Tap Hammer Aircraft Tool" is joining my tool set. This Boeing developed tool measures impact delay and provides relative, quantitative numbers to all but eliminate subjective evaluation of the tap-test results. A really simple solution to the 110 degree, light cone is to make a hemisphere placed behind the LED light to limit the rear, top, and bottom cone. There is no problem with covering it with a reflective film.

Apparently Cessnas use Molex connectors so I've ordered a Saber connector kit. This will build out the wing wiring and start the wiring rework. There is a Utube video on tap testing what appears to be a large, composite propeller. I suggested at Homebuiltairplanes.com, composite forum, that we need some Utube/MPEGs showing tap testing finding a delamination, mapping it out, and repair. My wing aileron bellcrank and tubes should be here next week. The parts are coming together and the wing should be ready for reassembly if not next week, the first week of March. There are two, stop-holes for cracks on the right, wing-tip plexiglass cover. Some suggest using an acetone-plexiglass mix to seal the cracks. There is also a canopy repair method that 'builds up' a crack repair on a canopy but these parts are significantly smaller. The stop-holes and cracks need to be sealed to minimize water invasion. 2012/02/25 - Color code, More weight and balance, navigation light, Dragonfly list Apparently there is no aircraft color code and N19WT was built using just white wire. But I need to rework the wing wiring and eventually the instrument panel and engine. So I plan to use the following color code:

black - current return or signal ground, Wicks red - 12V power, Wicks blue - signal, Wicks

I can get Tefzel insulation, 150C, MIL-W-22759/16 from Wicks and probably something similar from Spruce. But in the meanwhile, I have built-in wiring in the wing, all white. So I'll use colored heat-shrink to "tag" the wire where it comes to the connectors or device. In the case of the BA15S, the color code of the solder joint will determine the function of both wires regardless of their existing color (aka., car parts use black for 12V.) Based upon partial fractions and the empty weight of N19WT:

694 lbs @56.84" :: N19WT 172.6 lbs @7.38" :: HAPI engine 521.4 lbs @75.66" :: airframe

This does not include the propeller which will be part of the final configuration and analysis. The original prop weight, 4.9 lbs, is included in the airframe weight and balance. I only took out the HAPI engine so the prop will have to be taken

from the airframe weight and balance. But for now, we don't have the alternate engine prop weights and momement. Then the new prop is selected, the final analysis will need to take out the original prop and add in the new one. But for estimating the amount of firewall-to-engine space, these numbers will be close enough. Working on the weight and balance for each engine option it looks the space between the firewall and engine mounting:

7.63" - HAPI 1835cc 9.31" - Hirth 3702 12.66" - Jabiru 21.86" - Hirth 3502 27.76" - HKS 700e

Although the Hirth 3502 provides the largest amount of space, trying to fit the radiator and duct around and in that space would be a challenge. An ideal use would be the parachute recovery system. Note this analysis does not include the propellers, just the engines. Looking at the BSR/Magnum products:

Magnum 620 - 14.2x9.5x12.2 38 lbs, 1367 lbs, 187 mph BSR 1350HS - 20x8.5x6 33 lbs (w/o rocket), 1350 lbs, 184 mph BSR 1350 - 16x10x6 29 lbs (w/o rocket), 1350 lbs, 138 mph

Mounted at the front and attached to the engine mount anchors, there would only need to be rear runners or steel cables to attach to the wing bulkheads. I reworked the wing tip mount:

This is a stronger part with a better socket mount. I tap tested the upper and lower wing surface and found the only 'hollow' sounds were the wing tips and sections behind the drag spar. All other areas tested solid with the peak wing thickness to leading edge being especially solid. Apparently I have been removed from the Yahoo Dragonfly list. Someone called my engine analysis "twisted" as if calling something "twisted" was enough. I'm not used to having my work called false with no empirical facts and data . . . just labeling it "twisted." Life is too short for such nonsense. Worse, it came to a head in an EAA forum where I went to get two-cycle information and was 'followed' by the Dragonfly list member. Regardless, I've added an e-mail notice link and address for those who read these web pages and have questions or comments. 2012/02/24 - Nav light weight Comparing the original equipment and the new navigation light:

4.4 oz - Grimes and plates, 1.15 A. 1.8 oz - LED and plate, 133 ma. 2.6 oz - Tandy strobe, 310-340 ma. both strobes

2012/02/23 - Engine weight and LEDs The original engine without the Ellison and exhaust stacks came in:

172.6 lbs - engine 1.3 lbs - Ellison 7.0 lbs - exhaust stacks and carb heat box

The 10 W LEDs arrived 'OH BOY!' At 11V, 900 ma., each generates 1000 lum. and terribly bright. Even a 9V battery throws a lot of light. I've ordered some Freshnel lenses to see if they might work as landing lights. I would have no problem with a solid light that illuminates the canard when taking off or landing. However, I may need a low-drop, voltage regulator after I measure the voltage drop on the wing tip wiring.

The first wing tip, navigation light:

I had the red LED handy but the green belongs on this tip. One problem is I canabilized the BA-15S socket from some units bought at a surplus outlet. These sockets were cheap enough but they hold the bulb further out than desired. Part 23 limits the amount of red and green overlap so on-coming traffic can tell if our orientation is right or left of their point of view. With too much overlap, the other pilot can not tell if we are coming straight at them or pointed to the right or left of their path. I can't use this part as built. The single pop rivet is a little too flimsey for this size socket and bulb but it allows checking the fit and spacing. However, now I can measure the offset and fabricate a stand-off so the bulb will be on the wing-tip plane. Also, the unpolished aluminum part reflects enough. 2012/02/20 - Estate papers, open house I received papers from the law office handling the estate of the late Waldo Born that includes copies to the widow and the FAA. Dated February 14, it was a nice Valentines Day present. It is up to the FAA now. We had an open house for the chapter which included five adults and two kids. I asked the older child to move the propellers to the work table and put the seat cushions in. Not only did the kids but two adults sat in the plane. I also loaned back issues of Contact to the newsletter editor. All in all, great success because the members now see I have a serious project and sensible approach. We had some discussion about the shoulder harness bolts, fiberglassed plates, and safety wire. There was speculation about 'nut plates' some skepticism about the bolt-to-bolt head, safety wire pattern. We also discussed the 366 lb useful load. I found a small crack forming in the left, tip lense so I drilled a stop-hole with a Dremel tool. Then a second crack formed from the first, stop-crack hole! I drilled a stop hole for that one too but it sure was disappointing. It is possible I may have to fabricate a replacement. I've gotten most of the caulk removed by using a flat, screw driver. I tried but found the 'caulk remover' is not effective. Regardless, it looks better but for a thin layer of mold around the rim. The Wicks quote for the Dragonfly hardware came in $1,040.14 but it shows a credit card. I'll check the Visa balance on Tuesday and see if they'll take a personal check. I had been using the Visa card while waiting for the debit card to come in.

I thought there were cold-gas, parachute recovery systems but Google didn't find them. Regardless, it looks like the options are:

Magnum 620 - 1367 lbs, 187 mph, 37.4 lbs, 14.2x9.5x12.2 Magnum 501 - 1050 lbs, 187 mph, 21.3 lbs, 14.2x9.5x7.9 BSR 1350HS - 1350 lbs, 184 mph, 33 lbs, 20x9.5x6 BSR 1050HS - 1050 lbs, 184 mph, 24 lbs, 12x1x6

2012/02/19 - Rapid prototype and ballistics parachute I am replacing the 1987, Grimes navigation lights with LEDs and this means fabricating a new set of wing-tip, aluminum plates. I used PowerPoint to make an initial sketch but by the time I got to the work shed, I had a better design in mind. So I used a piece of shirt cardboard to fabricate a template:

Notice there was an early cutout.

The first version had a problem as I'd trimmed too much off of the top:

It was easy to toss the first one and make a second one that fit. So looking at both aspects, the cardboard prototype provides a template to fabricate the aluminum part:

I've already used the cardboard template to fabricate two aluminum pieces, the left and right wing tips. Using the PowerPoint sketch, I can now cut the socket hole and mount it to meet the Part 23 requirements.

I still have to fabricate upper and lower light shields to meet the 110 degree light cone and add the reflecting sheet. Then I'll have to drill the mounting access; install the aircraft grade nutplates, and; assemble the tips. I have all of the old parts and will be able to weigh and old and new parts. Then I'll put the Grimes units for sale. I also disassembled and inspected the right aileron:

I am still waiting on the replacement parts. The ballistics parachute needs mounting points so I'm thinking:

two straps around the wing

There is a gap on the outside of each attachment point. The straps can run around the front of the wing near the bolts that hold the shoulder strap anchors:

The parachute straps can run between the shoulder strap anchors and the lift attachment points.

one kelvar wrap around the canard:

This kelvar belt will fit between the lift and drag attachment points and attach to a pair of parachute webs via "D" ring fittings attached on either side of the center console. It makes sense to move the center stick to the left side which complements the plan to have center console mounted engine controls. The canard attachment, parachute webs follow the space between seats and exit back to the rear bulkhead opening:

A fitting or strap can hold the web straps behind the bulkhead center beam so there would be no risk of invading the pilot or passenger space. Testing the ballistics parachute would start with a static test where the aircraft is suspended by the parachute straps. The test requirements will be load sharing between the straps and a 'wing low' descent attitude. There are two rocket styles, pyrotechnique and cold-gas. Testing either one posses a risk to the pilot and passenger as well as the fuselage. One possibility is to mount the rocket launcher in a sacrifical fuselage. Then with cameras running, do a live fire with a dummy, parachute load and over-pressure and blast detectors for the pilot and passenger. With a cold-gas rocket, the planned storage pockets will be enough. If we go with a pyrotechnique rocket, a fire shield will be needed and tested. The last thing is to fabricate a quick release mechanism for the wing cover and test the firing lanyard. This does not have to launch the rocket. 2012/02/18 - Engine choices There are three serious options:

138 lbs - 2200cc Jabiru, 85 hp, 63 hp, 4 gal/hr @75% 118 lbs* - 625cc, Hirth 3502, 60 hp, 3.9 gal/hr @5000 rpm, 4.7 gal/hr @5,750 rpm 108 lbs - 680cc, HKS-700E, 60 hp, 4.2 gal/hr @6200 rpm (3 min)

The next level of analysis will be to look at secondary aspects of each engine. For example, complexity, TBO, available excess power and modeling with N19WT in X-plane. The HKS has a 3 minute, time limited, 60 hp mode whereas both the Jibiru and Hirth have no time limit on 60 hp operation. An interesting EAA article on two-cycle engines 2012/02/16 - Engine choices

Which engine would you choose? Why? Added the Rotex 582 which fails the range requirement. 2012/02/15 - Engine planning These are some engines that have flown on other Dragonfly and spec valid candidates:

225 lbs - 2700cc Corvair, 90 hp, 67hp, 5.6 gal/hr @75% 199 lbs - 3290cc O-200, 100 hp, 6.3 gal/hr 176 lbs - 1800cc, Subaru, 115 hp, 4.1 gal/hr 170 lbs - 2331cc Revmaster, 80 hp, ? gal/hr 163 lbs - 1835cc, VW, 65 hp, Great Plains, 3.5(?) gal/hr

152 lbs - 1835cc, VW, HAPI, 60 hp, 3.5 gal/hr 147 lbs* - 939cc, Hirth 3702, 60 hp, 3.9 gal/hr @4,000 rpm-84 hp, 6.2 gal/hr @5,000 rpm 138 lbs - 2200cc Jabiru, 85 hp, 63 hp, 4 gal/hr @75% 118 lbs* - 625cc, Hirth 3502, 60 hp, 3.9 gal/hr @5000 rpm, 4.7 gal/hr @5,750 rpm _98 lbs - 625cc, Hirth 3203, 65 hp, 6.5 gal/hr @6,300 rpm

* Includes 20 lbs estimate for radiator and coolant. 2012/02/14 - Firewall planning

Only reducing weight increases payload so here are some reported engine weights:

_98 lbs - 60 hp, two-cycle, Hirth 3502, w/o radiator 163 lbs - 1835 cc, Great Plains w starter 170 lbs - A65, Wiki report w/o starter 170 lbs - O-200, Wiki report w/o starter

2012/02/13 - FAA on flight testing, Contact Review I sent a note to the FSDO about flight testing and got the following reply:

Hi Mr. Wilson, The FAA Form 8130-6 is an application for, or amendments to airworthiness certificates, like an engine model change would require an amendment to the 8130-6 and Operating limitations giving you additional flight testing time of 25 hours on the new Operating Limitations and this would require me to inspect your aircraft prior to issuance. Thanks, George B. Castleberry Principal Maintenance Inspector GA/AW Alabama/Northwest Florida FSDO 1500 Urban Center Drive Suite 250 Vestavia Hills, AL 35242 Phone: 205-876-1352 Fax: 205-876-1358 From: To: Date: Subject: call] Hi George, My A&P, Harold, came out to the work shed Thursday evening and inspected my setup and a preliminary review of N19WT. Harold asked if we used a certified engine, say an A-65, instead of the per-design, 1835 cc VW engine, would that eliminate or change the number of hours needed to fly off the Form 8130-6? Harold suggested that since the airframe had already gone through the initial, restricted flight program and has 150 hours, would use of a certified engine in this amateur built, N19WT, eliminate or modify the restricted flight testing? Also, Harold confirmed the firewall engine mount points are 'out of round' and suggested a repair approach. I want to do my own stress analysis but I was wondering, is reviewing a critical repair something your office does for amateur built airplanes? I have an abundance of caution about some things and engines and engine mounts is one of them. I have no problem (and appreciate) when experts are able to render an opinion. But it will take me a couple of weeks to complete my stress analysis and assemble a package. Neither of these are pressing problems as I don't anticipate getting to the final engine and engine mount decisions until late spring, May-June, at the earliest. We still have a list of things to inspect, fix, and document in the rest of the airframe. Nearly two weeks ago, I sent the widow of the previous owner the FAA forms I had gotten from OKC along with a stamped envelope to forward her 'power of attorney' information. With any luck, I'll be the registered owner of N19WT the end of February or mid-March. In the bwilson4web George B Castleberry/ASO/FAA@FAA 02/03/2012 09:26 AM About engines for N19WT [Re: Follow-up on N19WT phone

meanwhile, I have the 'pink' form 8050-1 with the aircraft log in my newly started "Aircraft Maintenance Book: N19WT". As always, if you are in the Huntsville area and have time, let me know. I'd love to show you my work shed and N19WT. Thanks, Bob Wilson 256-961-9391

I also got a note from another Dragonfly owner that any changes to the powerplant including a propeller change have to be 'flown off.' He reported 10 hours which makes sense for a propeller change. An engine change would and should be longer if nothing else than to confirm the flight characteristics and weight and balance. Good, fast, cheap, pick two: I choose GOOD everytime. I finished reading all issues of _Contact_ magazine and learned some valuable lessons:

Torsional vibration is often poorly understood but literally blew-up the BD-5 development. The ultimate fix was a free-wheeling clutch so excess inertia from the prop can not feed back into the engine. Such a simple solution, light yet effective, it aleviates any need for energy absorbing couplings. The prop expends its excess energy in pulling the plane forward and the next engine power pulse catches up. P-51 cooling was radically efficent because the air was significantly slowed down before reaching the radiator. A British study gave the North American engineers a clue and they used it. The scoop below the fuselage does not show that twice that distance is taken up in the fuselage with the radiator. Smooth ducting allows the air to slow-down and pickup the heat at low velocities. This improves radiator efficiency as there is more time to warm the air. Then the air smoothly accelerates out the rear by the taper. An automatic, gate relieved the pilot of another cockpit chore. As for sizing the radiator, find a light-weight, efficient automotive radiator sized for the equivalent engine power. For example, if I choose to use a 60 hp, water cooled Hirth 3502, I would look at the 1.5L and 1.8L Prius radiators. Since these radiators also include a second loop for air conditioning, it can be used to increase the effective cooling by running it in parallel with the coolant loop. Augmented exhaust has been used to provide ground, cooling air flow. There are probably NASA/NCAA design articles and this bears further investigation. In an ideal world, an exhaust augmentation tube can provide not only airflow for ground cooling but might provide additional thrust if the excess heat can mix and expand the cool air. Stock, automotive fuel and electrical systems often have a poorly documented, "safe home" mode that engine power levels can trigger. It is better to go with an aftermarket, fuel injection and ignition system that does not include such 'safe home' modes.

The stock, Corvair crankshaft, even with bigger bearings, still has issues with fractures in flight. This could be an undiagnosed, torsional vibration issue or just the fact that autograde crankshafts should be treated as an unreliable part. Successful O-200 installations use aftermarket, SDS, electronic fuel and ignition systems. The strong, aircraft grade case, crank, and mechanical parts are married with high efficiency fuel and spark. However, the fuel consumption and weight still remains a problem. Proper use of an aftermarket, EFI system means redunancy in the new technology: o dual, independent power - must have capacity 2x fuel duration o dual, independent controllers - run either/or mode, possibly both during takeoff o dual, primary sensors - cam shaft/crank sensors split for each controller o dual, sparkplugs - if head supports them without residing in oil bath o dual, fuel pumps and filters - run either/or mode, possibly both during takeoff o dual, fuel injectors - run either/or mode, without O{2} sensors, OR mode Designing redundancy and fail-safe modes, flight power, limp-home mode, is not a trivial problem. But it is a lot easier to handle the design and testing before building and flying.

I am seeing a lot of engine failures that 'smell' of torsional vibration issues. That something is hard to measure does not mean it doesn't exist. But now I understand the "torque limiter" found in the four-cylinder Toyota Prius engines. The torque limiter is just a clutch-plate, bolted on to the flywheel. It can wear WHEN the engine and transmission get into a speed and power range that has torsional vibration resonance. In these cases, the clutch plate simply 'slips' limiting the feedback, the amplitude of the torsional resonance. Such as simple solution and so few understand it. From an efficiency standpoint, a free-wheeling clutch is a better solution. 2012/02/09 - Lights, Engine mount repair, and parachute I have ordered some reflective sheeting and figured out my wing navigation light design. I've bought two, BA-15S sockets and will cut out two, new mount, aluminum sheets. The sockets will be mounted as high as the lip of the wing tip so the LED is fully exposed forward and to 110 degress off of the wing tip. The back-side and mount plate will be fully reflective so all light is

projected outward in the 110 degree arc. There may be an issue with upper and lower projections that may exceed the 110 degree plane to the rear but IF that becomes an issue, a simple light shield inside the plastic cover can solve it. Dragonfly N19WT has 150 hours on the Hobbs meter. We took the engine off including the mounts and preliminary examination shows the firewall, engine mount holes are out-of-round:

I plan to clean the angle aluminum and dye test for cracks. If I find cracks or other defects such as evidence of corrosion at the firewall, we'll fabricate a new firewall-based, engine mount, one that adds aluminum plates and interior fiberglass but this adds weight. So we have a workaround IF we can not rework the original mount. My A&P and I discussed the out-of-round holes which are a problem for the engine mount. We are thinking:

overside drill the holes insert an identically thick aluminum disk (same aluminum type as the mount) with an interference fit (aka., heat the anchors and dryice/nitrogen freeze the insert disk.) rivet identically thick, aluminum plate to outside of the two "L" surfaces drill engine mount holes per original spec but use the incremental method to size the hole exactly for the AN mount bolt

This would be a lighter weight repair than the fall-back, engine mount but I'm under the impression that rivets require some number, a pattern over an area, and require the rivet material to match the same type of aluminum in the plate and original anchor. We can't have different thermal expansion rates workharden or loosen the repair over time. However, the insert has me bothered. Even with a perfectly sized insert, there would be no tension strength, only compression strength. This is aluminum which means it tends to plastic flow,

to stretch over time. Due to the foam-and-fiberglass construction on the other side of the firewall, aluminum welding would be a big challenge. There are aluminum, cold-welding techniques but those are computer controlled, fixed piece welds, not an ad hoc, method. The only repair to the original anchor mounts is to do a stress analysis of the original part with the original sized holes. Determine the maximum stress they can support and the strain as a function of loads. This means for the original HAPI engine and prop, what is the load at which the part deforms and the load at which it fails. Now do the same analysis with the next, oversized holes. This also means the engine mount will have to be rebuilt using larger diameter, 4031 tube at the anchors. However, the four, oversized tubes will more than handle the engine stress and strain . . . if the firewall anchors will. I've read the first 50+, back issues of Contact with about 80 more to go. So far, my take-away:

Subaru's are popular - the best approach appears to be getting a fuelinjected, Subaru using the vehicle engine electronics. Goldwing - way too heavy in the one report. Retro-fit fuel injection is not a trivial or cheap solution. Single-point exhaust into an augmenter, one example, seems workable. Radiator design for water cooled engines is a non-trivial design problem. See P-51 article on cooling drag.

It turns out that a 1,050 lb, ballistic recovery chute costs ~$5,000 and adds about 30 lbs to the gross weight. The advantage is:

Safer night flights Opens the engine options including two-cycle engines

My first choice remains an 1835 cc, Great Plains engine since it matches Bob Walter's original design goals. However, there sure are a lot of folks who advocate other engines ranging from A-65, O-200, Subaru, Corvair . . . Adding the ballistic chute means we can 'reliability' gets a reduced valuation when the final engine selection is made. We can look at engines from a pure performance standpoint. 2012/02/04 - FAA light requirements
23.1385 23.1387 23.1389 23.1391 lights. Position light system installation. N,17,43 Position light system dihedral angles. N,12,43 Position light distribution and intensities. N,43 Minimum intensities in the horizontal plane of position N,43

23.1393 23.1395 N,43 23.1397 23.1399 23.1401

Minimum intensities in any vertical plane of position lights. Maximum intensities in overlapping beams of position lights. Color specifications. N,11 Riding light. N Anticollision light system.

N,43

N,11,20,49

2012/02/03 - A&P survey, parts and tools I really need to add at least one strong, drop light to work on the fuselaage. Also, I need a better plan to overlap material delays for parts and work. Harold, my A&P, came out and gave me a lot of help:

out of round engine mount holes - he saw it immediateately and we discussed options. For example, another aluminum plate rivited to the first; drill out the hole and put in a bushing; and drill the bushing to fit. This is such a critical part, doing a full stress analysis makes sense but it sounds feasable. From the web is a suggestion to use loctite when seating the bushing. Certainly from a strength of materials and thermal exspansion view, this makes a lot of sense. Best of all, less weight than the alternative engine mount. fuselage forward hatch - well received. It will take planning but we both agree this makes sense. rudder pedal relocation - we discussed the options and I have to do some measurements to find out if canard forward works. Also, we'll measure the diameter of the brake cylinders and replace the rubber parts. wing left drag bulkhead nutplate - OK wing bellcrank part inspected and the nut on the bad one has too little thread showing working relationship - I will disassemble, inspect but only together will we reassemble the parts so he sees or does 'hands on' what needs to be done. reviewed paperwork and the Aircraft Maintenance Log with descrepancy forms. FAA Part 43, 12 recommended to address electrical connectors discussed options on circuit breaker panel and panel changes: replace NAV/COM with Comm, GPS, and Mode-C. Also replacement of the ELT. need to ask FSDO if use of a certified engine instead of a VW makes a change in the flight restriction fly-off.

The wing electrical work will remove the strobes and safety the wire ends using heat-shrink. I need to find a reflector to cover the former strobe mount. However, we will put red and black heat-shrink to identify each wire at the wing root and tip.

We need to check the FARS on navigation light viewing angle. The A&P thinks they need to be seen to the rear but the the Sport Aviation article claimed they need a 140 degree view with a forward line of sight. We'll get the FAA guidance and comply. We both see the navigation light connectors, spade lugs in heat-shrink, as the wrong solution. The A&P recommended getting an aviation grade, connector and I agree. I've ordered a 1/4", aircraft grade, torque wrench which should be here about the time the parts arrive. We'll see what the calibration looks like. 2012/02/01 - Navigation light and parts The LED navigation light eleminates the lens, the flairing, and replaces the bulb:

1.15A - original bulb current 0.133A - LED current

The strobes work although they are soldered into Radio Shack units. I wonder what temperature range the caps are rated for and power transistor. Sad to say, the electronics were not anchored and the reflector had only one screw holding it in.

0.310A - minimum, dual-flasher current 0.341A - maximum, dual-flasher current

The nuts holding the engine rubber bushings were loose but cotter pins held them in place.

Here are some preliminary photos of the rear fuselage:

Removed the wing cover to survey the mount. Also measured width of canard and wing attachment points to understand the area blanked out:

43.55 ft. sq. - canard lift area 8.81 ft. sq. - canard fuselage area 40.73 ft. sq. - wing lift area 7.24 ft. sq. - wing fuselage area ~100.33 ft. sq. - total wing and canard area

So how much lift does the fuselage generate over the canard and wing?
1 each ALB-1 Aileron Bellcrank 1 each 4130 1/2" x 0.049 x 7 3/4" 8 each MS21042-L3 Nut 4 each AN3-10A Bolt 4 each AN3-13A Bolt 8 each AN960-10 Washer Shipping Total Richard Kaczmarek Fast Little Airplanes $90.00 $3.78 $3.20 $1.00 $1.20 $2.00 $10.00 $111.18

2232 North State Route 559 Woodstock, OH 43084 937-243-7303 fastlittleairplanes@gmail.com

Increased the tube count to replace both sides. I still don't have a good model of what I can and can not do to N19WT. An amateur built plane can be modified by the owner but maintenance must be done by an A&P. Regardless, I have no problem with the A&P being handson with N19WT . . . I spent nearly 40 years learning and practicing computer and network skills, not haning at the airport and learning how to handle aircraft. It is 'career shortening' to ignore experts.