Just another opinion and a look at this from a different perspective - It's left up to the reader to glean the truth. << 1. When sanding the shell, the difference in resistance to sanding between

Hey guys, I'm back in order now after being OTS for a week. I had over 175 messages by the time I finally got my mail today. Last Thursday my friendly neighborhood volunteer moving service

Paul I found your E-mail to be informative. And I am glad you took the time to write. You obviously did MORE than hear the various techniques on building and then form an opinion of what system to

David, I dug through my CSA's last night but could not find the info that I mentioned yesterday. I suspect the discussion was on one of the mailing lists rather than CSA. Sorry about that. Jon

Thank you for your assistance. I believe the canard is the GU airfioil, as it has vortex generators attached. The Engine is a Revmaster 2100 DQ and seems to have been sitting for some time. I

Dave, there are a couple of reasons why the hard shelling technique is not optimum. They are: 1. When sanding the shell, the difference in resistance to sanding between micro and foam is so great

Hi Dave There was a lot of discussion at least 10 years ago about the pros and cons of allowing the micro to cure before laying up the glass. It was generally thought to be a good idea as it allowed

If you use denatured alcohol to thin the "dry micro" for finishing, the foam will not erode. My 2 cents worth. Bruce Crain On Wed, 6 Dec 2000 12:26:46 -0600 "Jon Finley"

Hi When I wrote the question I was using my little Tosh notebook, little keys big fingers, slow typing. I'm back on my regular machine so that means lots of typlexia and bad spelling...;-] What I

Hi David, I don't recall what RAF had to say about it, I would certainly think one of those guys asked. It was at least a couple years ago. I will see if I can lay my hands on them tonight and let

I read something ages ago saying that Rutan (RAF) clearly poo-pooed the practice of sprinkling microballoons on wet lay-ups because it would tend to pull up epoxy and starve the lower layers of needed

Hello Jon: Boy!, having done only the "wet micro" lay-ups, what you say seems counter intuitive to me... In what way is the "dry micro" lay-up easier/faster/better? You mention the ease of air

Jon, I must have missed this item. Did RAF ever endorse the hard-shell procedure? If not, did they ever renounce it? Either way, can you narrow down the approximate year in either the CSA or RAF

Dave, Chris, No, the glass is to be laid up over WET micro slurry. The wet slurry is what provides the mechanical bond between the glass and the foam. If there are any voids in the foam, fill them

Oh yea, as I recall the weight penalty on large items (wings, winglets) was pretty small. Seems like the big items weighed a pound or two more when hard shelled. Again, see CSA back issues for

I have seen layups use both techniques. The Q plans call for the micro to be wet (not dry) when you apply the glass. The EZ community has done a lot of experimentation with what they call "hard

Your instincts are right about the micro. Don't let it harden before you lay down your glass. There is a section in the beginning of the manual that takes you through a "confidence builder"

You won't get a very good bond between the micro and the glass lay-up if the micro is allowed to dry. QAC warns us about micro between glass layers as well. You are right that the more accurate the

Dave- Yes, you do need the to sand the micro before you add the glass. The micro, from what I understand, just makes the surface more true in reguards to smoothness and contour, resulting in less

Hi All Obviously I have a couple of questions ;-] The first one is simple. When you lay down micro on a foam core do you let it harden and then sand or do you carry on and start adding the glass.