Larry,

You have to watch very closely the information that comes from some people
(I know you know this). Certain individuals will make wild statements or
claims just because they have bought an airplane, even though they have
never done any work on it or even flown it (or maybe they do not even have
an airplane at all). That is one of the drawbacks of these email lists,
someone can claim they know everything when in fact they may have never even
have sat in the airplane they are proclaiming to be an expert on.

For my airplanes (a pair of Dragonfly's) the PTM&W AeroPoxy has worked very
well. The only drawback for guys who have maybe used the old epoxy with a
pump is the ratio is different.

Jeff
Dragonfly MK-IIH N41GK, 24.1 hours on the modifications and 390.1 hours on
the airplane
Dragonfly MK-III N1277W - a few years working on the MK-I to MK-III
conversion.....a few years to go

Jeff,
Yes, I am aware of that, but someone new to the list might take it as gospel. That's what chaps my hide! Getting to be quite a number of them on this list, and I see the D-Fly list gets a "larikin" on occasion, too.

Q's are a challenge to build and fly anyway, without having wild assertions made with little basis in fact. I've only been around this list four years, and still prefer to let the more seasoned members respond to requests for info. None of them challenged this post, so I stepped in.

Thanks for the response,
Larry

Letempt, Jeffrey CW4 wrote:

Jeff,

Dumb logic. Someone having built an airplane (or surfboard, or patched
a fender with a glassing kit) doesn't make them a freaking polymer
chemist. Please engage brain before setting keyboard in motion.

Rob


--- In Q-LIST@..., "Letempt, Jeffrey CW4"
<jeffrey.letempt@u...> wrote:

Larry,

You have to watch very closely the information that comes from some

people

(I know you know this). Certain individuals will make wild

statements or

claims just because they have bought an airplane, even though they have
never done any work on it or even flown it (or maybe they do not

even have

an airplane at all). That is one of the drawbacks of these email lists,
someone can claim they know everything when in fact they may have

never even

have sat in the airplane they are proclaiming to be an expert on.

For my airplanes (a pair of Dragonfly's) the PTM&W AeroPoxy has

worked very

well. The only drawback for guys who have maybe used the old epoxy

with a

pump is the ratio is different.

Jeff
Dragonfly MK-IIH N41GK, 24.1 hours on the modifications and 390.1

hours on

the airplane
Dragonfly MK-III N1277W - a few years working on the MK-I to MK-III
conversion.....a few years to go

-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Hamm [mailto:LDHAMM@X...]
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 12:15 AM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Foam???



Rob,

Where do you come up with this, umm, info? I don't think Safe-T-Poxy

has

been around since it was discovered to contain carcinogens, some 15
years or so ago.

Why would one need to redesign the plane to use other epoxy??? I'm

quite

sure many have been built using E-Z Poxy, West System epoxy, and my
personal favorite, Aeropoxy.

While there is CERTAINLY a lot of redesigning being done, I don't know
of any of it relating to the brand of epoxy being used.

Larry Hamm
Park City, UT
"SubyQ"

HAIQU_OZ wrote:

What brand name of epoxy is best?

The recommended epoxy is Safe-T-Poxy. Use anything else and you will
have to redesign the airplane.

Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org


Yahoo! Groups Links

In a message dated 12/3/04 12:33:50 AM Central Standard Time, judd@...
writes:

Dumb logic. Someone having built an airplane (or surfboard, or patched
a fender with a glassing kit) doesn't make them a freaking polymer
chemist. Please engage brain before setting keyboard in motion.

Rob

But then there are not a lot of polymer chemists who have kitplanes on the
FAA Registry. Jeff et. al. who are tempted to waste time on a person who wants
to display his intellectual prowess to an audience... just hit the DELETE key
when you see "judd " show up like I will. Your life will be just fine not
knowing. There are so many opinions that you already dont know and your life
isn't any worse for it. Relax, have a beer, work on your airplane and don't get
caught in a useless vortex.
j.

C'mon, gimme a kiss. I know you want to.

Rob

--- In Q-LIST@..., JMasal@a... wrote:

In a message dated 12/3/04 12:33:50 AM Central Standard Time, judd@o...
writes:

Dumb logic. Someone having built an airplane (or surfboard, or patched
a fender with a glassing kit) doesn't make them a freaking polymer
chemist. Please engage brain before setting keyboard in motion.

Rob

But then there are not a lot of polymer chemists who have kitplanes

on the

FAA Registry. Jeff et. al. who are tempted to waste time on a person

who wants

to display his intellectual prowess to an audience... just hit the

DELETE key

when you see "judd " show up like I will. Your life will be just

fine not

knowing. There are so many opinions that you already dont know and

your life

isn't any worse for it. Relax, have a beer, work on your airplane

and don't get

caught in a useless vortex.
j.

Rob,

This is tooooooo funny. I never said it was you that was the self
proclaimed expert. Many builders have safely used epoxy other than
Safe-T-Poxy builing their Q or Dragonfly and several people have told you
what they used as a substitute for Safe-T-Poxy. I have personally used
PTM&W Aeropoxy over existing Safe-T-Poxy and it worked perfectly fine. You
can do a little research and find the properties of different epoxies to see
if they will meet or exceed your requirements. Their is no need to
completely redesign the airplane just because Safe-T-Poxy is no longer
available. You will never get your Quickie flying using this logic.

Good luck.

Jeff