This message came in today from one of Tailwind gurus.

This is NOT good news, so I'm considering it as bad news.


Richard Lamb

---------------------------------------------------------------

I just talked to Charllie at Dillsburg concerting 4130 sheet. I now
call weekly for the latest update. According to Charlie (and I agree)
what we are seeing with 4130 is endemic of the entire steel supply.
Over the years, America's ability to manufacture our own steel has
steadily diminished to the point where we are now dependent of CHINA
for 4130. They can charge whatever they want and deliver according to
their own convenience.

Out sourcing of our ability to produce the products we need is a
disaster that threatens everything. Terrorists, who want to see the
end of our country, don't need to do a thing except wait. Our own
stupidity, greed and laziness will do the job for them. Jerry

Richard Lamb wrote ...
> This message came in today from one of Tailwind gurus.
>
> ...
> Over the years, America's ability to manufacture our own steel has
> steadily diminished to the point where we are now dependent of CHINA
> for 4130. They can charge whatever they want and deliver according to
> their own convenience.
>

Having done a bit of work with the steel industry, I have to point out
a couple of common fallacies in the above.

#1, there is absolutely no problem in America's ability to manufacture
4130 sheet (or any other alloy). The limitation is not in the ability
to make it, but rather in the lack of demand. There simply isn't
enough demand to warrant making 4130 sheet, even in the modern, highly
successful and highly profitable mini-mills such as Nucor.

#2, regarding the Chinese, they're neither "charging what they want"
nor "delivering according to their own convenience". That's why you
don't see new stock being delivered at any price. They're not
interested in the 4130 sheet niche either.

Daniel

karel adams wrote:
> "Richard Lamb" > schreef in bericht
> ...
>
>>This message came in today from one of Tailwind gurus.
>>
>>This is NOT good news, so I'm considering it as bad news.
>>
>>
>>Richard Lamb
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>I just talked to Charllie at Dillsburg concerting 4130 sheet. I now
>>call weekly for the latest update. According to Charlie (and I agree)
>>what we are seeing with 4130 is endemic of the entire steel supply.
>>Over the years, America's ability to manufacture our own steel has
>>steadily diminished to the point where we are now dependent of CHINA
>>for 4130. They can charge whatever they want and deliver according to
>>their own convenience.
>>
>> Out sourcing of our ability to produce the products we need is a
>>disaster that threatens everything. Terrorists, who want to see the
>>end of our country, don't need to do a thing except wait. Our own
>>stupidity, greed and laziness will do the job for them. Jerry
>
>
> Looking on from faraway Europe I can only agree.
> Exactly the same thing is happening here
> (but also with wheat from the US...)
>
> Some call this the advantages of the worldwide market...
>
> Karel
>
>

The only thing we have to do to stop the outsourcing is require all
companies to obey the same environmental and workplace safety laws that
companies struggle under here (here being any so called '1st world'
nation). The list of regulations we dump on someone when they seek to
employ another makes the FAA look libertarian. If the Chinese operators
had to provide even half of the safety measures that are required here,
they could not hope to compete. But it's a lot cheaper to produce steel
when you can clog the air as we did in the 50s and 60s, and cheaper to
produce chemicals when you can run the waste out a pipe and into the
stream out back.

Stand up for workers rights and environmental
protection...EVERYWHERE...not just the US/Europe.

I'm just glad I bought all the sheet I will need two years ago. Where
are you and how much do you need?

--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
alleviated by information and experience."
Veeduber

Richard Lamb wrote:

>I just talked to Charllie at Dillsburg concerting 4130 sheet. I now
>call weekly for the latest update. According to Charlie (and I agree)
>what we are seeing with 4130 is endemic of the entire steel supply.
>Over the years, America's ability to manufacture our own steel has
>steadily diminished to the point where we are now dependent of CHINA
>for 4130. They can charge whatever they want and deliver according to
>their own convenience.

The Chinese are having a HUGE building boom in the free trade zone. This is
driving the price of all steels sky high and many other materials used in
building. With everyone from Boeing to Intel moving there what can we expect?
(Intel is moving manufacturing AND R&D).

It is a basic supply/demand problem.

-- Charlie Springer

(Daniel) wrote in message >...
> #1, there is absolutely no problem in America's ability to manufacture
> 4130 sheet (or any other alloy). The limitation is not in the ability
> to make it, but rather in the lack of demand. There simply isn't
> enough demand to warrant making 4130 sheet, even in the modern, highly
> successful and highly profitable mini-mills such as Nucor.

> Daniel

Rather than a lack of demand I think it might be more accurate to say
that there is more demand for other kinds of steel products. This is
because the production capacity is pretty well maxed out. If it were
not there would be someone trying to find an unfilled niche.

But no matter the reason - there is no 4130N available - and IMHO
there probably won't be for maybe several years.

So it looks like we need to find a substitute. I've been doing some
looking for the last couple of months but I'm no metallurgist and most
of my time has been spent educating myself in the ways of steel. So
far my local steel store has not been able to get anything I have come
up with unless I want to buy a whole truck load. I don't/can't.

Anyone have some opinions on a suitable substitute?
=================
Leon McAtee

Leon McAtee wrote:
>
> Rather than a lack of demand I think it might be more accurate to say
> that there is more demand for other kinds of steel products. This is
> because the production capacity is pretty well maxed out. If it were
> not there would be someone trying to find an unfilled niche.
>
> But no matter the reason - there is no 4130N available - and IMHO
> there probably won't be for maybe several years.
>
> So it looks like we need to find a substitute. I've been doing some
> looking for the last couple of months but I'm no metallurgist and most
> of my time has been spent educating myself in the ways of steel. So
> far my local steel store has not been able to get anything I have come
> up with unless I want to buy a whole truck load. I don't/can't.
>
> Anyone have some opinions on a suitable substitute?
> =================
> Leon McAtee


Well, now that you mention it, this does put the 4130/DOM(?)
argument in a slightly different light.

Anybody wanna say, "I told you so"?




Richard Lamb

http://home.earthlink.net/~n6228l/happy.htm
(My parasol - built of riveted extruded aluminum angle)

In > Leon McAtee wrote:

> But no matter the reason - there is no 4130N available - and IMHO
> there probably won't be for maybe several years.
>
> So it looks like we need to find a substitute. I've been doing some
> looking for the last couple of months but I'm no metallurgist and most
> of my time has been spent educating myself in the ways of steel. So
> far my local steel store has not been able to get anything I have come
> up with unless I want to buy a whole truck load. I don't/can't.

I was under the impression that 4130A (annealed) sheet was still
available, the only difference between that and 4130N (normalized) being
the heat treatment. It should be possible to have parts made from "A"
heat treated to "N" condition, right?

Also, the last time this was discussed there was only a shortage of
4130N sheet. Has that now spread to tubing as well?

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

One solution is to normalize your own sheet - apparently it IS
possible to get tempered 4130.

But I've been wondering if the solution isn't High Strength Low Alloy
(HSLA) steels. I know nothing about their weldability compared to
4130, but I do know that tons and tons of the stuff are used in cars
and industrial equipment.

That's where I think homebuilding and experimental aviation as a whole
needs to start looking.
>
> But no matter the reason - there is no 4130N available - and IMHO
> there probably won't be for maybe several years.
>
> So it looks like we need to find a substitute. I've been doing some
> looking for the last couple of months but I'm no metallurgist and most
> of my time has been spent educating myself in the ways of steel. So
> far my local steel store has not been able to get anything I have come
> up with unless I want to buy a whole truck load. I don't/can't.
>
> Anyone have some opinions on a suitable substitute?
> =================
> Leon McAtee

(Ryan Young) wrote in message >...
> One solution is to normalize your own sheet - apparently it IS
> possible to get tempered 4130.

Even the annealed stuff is in short supply. Last time I checked with
Dllsburg (about 10 days ago) he sad - maybe - in a month.

> But I've been wondering if the solution isn't High Strength Low Alloy
> (HSLA) steels. I know nothing about their weldability compared to
> 4130, but I do know that tons and tons of the stuff are used in cars
> and industrial equipment.

This is where my wanderings have lead me. Welding could be different.

http://www.us.cbmm.com.br/english/sources/techlib/info/weldabil/weldabi.htm

I know most auto manufactures prohibit gas welding the stuff. MIG or
TIG is OK and brass should not be a problem as long as the temp stays
low enough. Some of the HSLA's apparantly are highly corrosion
resistant as well.

ASTM A606, A1011, A1008 and ASTM A715 are specs of some steel that
might work. Supply should not be a problem in thicknes between .020"
and .125"

http://www.ussteel.com/corp/sheet/cr/crs.htm
===========================
Leon McAtee

On 11 May 2004 18:07:52 -0700, (Leon McAtee)
wrote:

(Ryan Young) wrote in message >...
>> One solution is to normalize your own sheet - apparently it IS
>> possible to get tempered 4130.
>
>Even the annealed stuff is in short supply. Last time I checked with
>Dllsburg (about 10 days ago) he sad - maybe - in a month.
>
>> But I've been wondering if the solution isn't High Strength Low Alloy
>> (HSLA) steels. I know nothing about their weldability compared to
>> 4130, but I do know that tons and tons of the stuff are used in cars
>> and industrial equipment.
>
>This is where my wanderings have lead me. Welding could be different.
>
>http://www.us.cbmm.com.br/english/sources/techlib/info/weldabil/weldabi.htm
>
>I know most auto manufactures prohibit gas welding the stuff. MIG or
>TIG is OK and brass should not be a problem as long as the temp stays
>low enough. Some of the HSLA's apparantly are highly corrosion
>resistant as well.

Brazing high strength alloy steel components of automotive bodies is
STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. Mig and tig are acceptable if done to
specifications - spot welding is most common.
>
>ASTM A606, A1011, A1008 and ASTM A715 are specs of some steel that
>might work. Supply should not be a problem in thicknes between .020"
>and .125"
>
>http://www.ussteel.com/corp/sheet/cr/crs.htm
>===========================
>Leon McAtee

> wrote in message
...

> Brazing high strength alloy steel components of automotive bodies is
> STRICTLY FORBIDDEN.

A. By whom?
B. Where?
C. For what use?

Rich S.

On Wed, 12 May 2004 12:47:27 -0700, "Rich S."
> wrote:

> wrote in message
...
>
>> Brazing high strength alloy steel components of automotive bodies is
>> STRICTLY FORBIDDEN.
>
>A. By whom?
>B. Where?
>C. For what use?
>
>Rich S.
>
A - by the auto manufacturers, the autobody trade, and anyone alse
involved in the inspection/qualification of auto body repairs in
Canada and the USA.

B ANY structural body part. - which is generally where HSA steel is
used

C - for onhighway use.

> wrote in message
...

>> Brazing high strength alloy steel components of automotive bodies is
>> STRICTLY FORBIDDEN.

> >A. By whom?

> A - by the auto manufacturers, the autobody trade, and anyone alse
> involved in the inspection/qualification of auto body repairs in
> Canada and the USA.

> >B. Where?

> B ANY structural body part. - which is generally where HSA steel is used

> >C. For what use?

> C - for onhighway use.

A. They are not my King, nor my God and I care not what they may FORBID.

B. Weren't we talking about the use of this steel in experimental airplanes?
(Actually, by "where" I meant "where in the world is such brazing "STRICTLY
FORBIDDEN" - which you answered in "A".)

C. I assume you mean in production automobiles. Unless you can tell me what
law pertains to the brazing of "high strength alloy steel components of
automotive bodies", I'm afraid I can lend little credence to your statement.
I really don't give a rat's ass what the "auto manufacturers, the autobody
trade, and anyone alse involved in the inspection/qualification of auto body
repairs in Canada and the USA." have proclaimed.

Come to think of it, I have never heard of anyone involved in the
inspection/qualification of auto body repairs. Is there such a governmental
body in Canada?

Rich S.

Rich S. wrote:

> Come to think of it, I have never heard of anyone involved in the
> inspection/qualification of auto body repairs.

Next time you whip out the Bondo(tm) watch out for the
guys in suits and sunglesses coming up your driveway.

Dave 'we're here to help' Hyde

"Dave Hyde" > wrote in message
...
> Rich S. wrote:
>
> > Come to think of it, I have never heard of anyone involved in the
> > inspection/qualification of auto body repairs.
>
> Next time you whip out the Bondo(tm) watch out for the
> guys in suits and sunglesses coming up your driveway.
>
> Dave 'we're here to help' Hyde
>

The main reason I quit the Fire Marshal business.

Rich "I'm from the gov. . ." S.

What a crock of ****!




>I know most auto manufactures prohibit gas welding the stuff. MIG or
> >TIG is OK and brass should not be a problem as long as the temp stays
> >low enough. Some of the HSLA's apparantly are highly corrosion
> >resistant as well.
>
> Brazing high strength alloy steel components of automotive bodies is
> STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. Mig and tig are acceptable if done to
> specifications - spot welding is most common.
> >



Simply because the slopeheads haven't built a robot to do it for them yet!

Q' What part of an aircraft would you want to use 4130 sheet steel for?


Ps I'd love to see a production car that has any TIG welding as part of
its constuction.

Cam.................

On Thu, 13 May 2004 15:08:06 -0700, "Rich S."
> wrote:

> wrote in message
...
>
>>> Brazing high strength alloy steel components of automotive bodies is
>>> STRICTLY FORBIDDEN.
>
>> >A. By whom?
>
>> A - by the auto manufacturers, the autobody trade, and anyone alse
>> involved in the inspection/qualification of auto body repairs in
>> Canada and the USA.
>
>> >B. Where?
>
>> B ANY structural body part. - which is generally where HSA steel is used
>
>> >C. For what use?
>
>> C - for onhighway use.
>
>A. They are not my King, nor my God and I care not what they may FORBID.
>
>B. Weren't we talking about the use of this steel in experimental airplanes?
>(Actually, by "where" I meant "where in the world is such brazing "STRICTLY
>FORBIDDEN" - which you answered in "A".)
>
>C. I assume you mean in production automobiles. Unless you can tell me what
>law pertains to the brazing of "high strength alloy steel components of
>automotive bodies", I'm afraid I can lend little credence to your statement.
>I really don't give a rat's ass what the "auto manufacturers, the autobody
>trade, and anyone alse involved in the inspection/qualification of auto body
>repairs in Canada and the USA." have proclaimed.
>

You may not give a rat's ass, but the high strength alloy steel sure
does. It is a HEAT TREATED steel, and it looses a very large
percentage of it's strength when heated to red hot - which is a
definite requirement for brazing.

>Come to think of it, I have never heard of anyone involved in the
>inspection/qualification of auto body repairs. Is there such a governmental
>body in Canada?
>

Keep the useless government out of it.
Trade groups like the SCRS, ASTM, APMA, ASE.AAC, ABPA, ASBE, and ACA,
along with the NHTSA all have something to say about it.

Specifically, look at:
http://www.autosteel.org/pdfs/ahss_repairability_phase2_study.pdf

This is LOW ALLOY steel - as compared to 4130,
I would not want to see it used, particularly by amatures, in
construction of aircraft with welding, or worse yet, brazing, involved
in the construction.
>Rich S.
>

Cam wrote:

> Q' What part of an aircraft would you want to use 4130 sheet steel for?
>

The list is rather long, but in the Delta, there are a lot of attachment
tabs, gussets, and that sort of thing.

--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
alleviated by information and experience."
Veeduber

On Sat, 15 May 2004 01:45:03 +1200, "Cam" > wrote:

>What a crock of ****!
>
>
>
>
> >I know most auto manufactures prohibit gas welding the stuff. MIG or
>> >TIG is OK and brass should not be a problem as long as the temp stays
>> >low enough. Some of the HSLA's apparantly are highly corrosion
>> >resistant as well.
>>
>> Brazing high strength alloy steel components of automotive bodies is
>> STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. Mig and tig are acceptable if done to
>> specifications - spot welding is most common.
>> >
>
>
>
>Simply because the slopeheads haven't built a robot to do it for them yet!
>
>Q' What part of an aircraft would you want to use 4130 sheet steel for?
>
>
>Ps I'd love to see a production car that has any TIG welding as part of
>its constuction.
>
>Cam.................
>
By the same token, any torch brazed components, or any O/A welded?

MIG and spot welding are almost exclusively used in automotive
manufacturing, under VERY strictly controlled process. The weld
spacings, weld heat, and weld positions are all ENGINEERED, and no
deviations are permitted.
This is to make sure the body is SAFE, and failure in case of
collision damage etc is predictable.

4140 plate is used for gussets, finger straps, brackets, control
bellcranks, landing gear fittings, float fittings, strut attatchments,
spar mounting points, flap and aelerin controls, to mention a few.
Something like 6 square feet overall in a Pegazair.

Earnest,

For what it's worth, I just got back from day 1 at SWRFI and
there IS a Dyke on display!

I have to admit, it is a cool plane.
Very different.

But it took 26 years to build???

(Somebody was goofing off!)


Richard

"Rich S." > wrote in message >...
> > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >> Brazing high strength alloy steel components of automotive bodies is
> >> STRICTLY FORBIDDEN.

I know that flame welding of HSLA's is verbotten by the Mfg's, some
state laws and common "good practice" but as far as I know brazing is
OK, though I don't know why anyone would want to when MIG is so quick
and clean. In fact I know that at least one US Mfg. MIGed some
pannels (primary structure)with brass wire, and probably still does.
Also from what I have been reading this "good practice" of MIGing HSLA
may be based on poor science. Seems that the common alloy used by
most autobody shops in their MIG's creates some poor welds due to
migration of the niobium and vandamanium in the HSLA into the HAZ
resulting in the potential for cracking. But...............

> B. Weren't we talking about the use of this steel in experimental airplanes?
> (Actually, by "where" I meant "where in the world is such brazing "STRICTLY
> FORBIDDEN" - which you answered in "A".)

Lets get back to finding a replacement for the 4130 used in
homebuilding. Then we can hash out the best way to fuse it for our
uses.

Is something like an HSLA mmanfactured to ASTM A606 (type 2 or
type4)standard suitable for aircraft parts formerally made of 4130?
Even if it isn't a 100% substitute for 4130 in a closely designed
structure, would it be acceptable for aircraft use if the part were
redesigned (upsized one size?)to better match the HSLA's strength? Is
sheet in thicknesses used by homebuilders available in this alloy?
For a reasonable price?
========================
Leon McAtee

Richard Lamb wrote:
> Earnest,
>
> For what it's worth, I just got back from day 1 at SWRFI and
> there IS a Dyke on display!
>
> I have to admit, it is a cool plane.
> Very different.
>
> But it took 26 years to build???
>
> (Somebody was goofing off!)
>
>
> Richard

That sounds like N78BS, Bernie Schnanowski's bird (just look at me name
dropping like I know people).

Are you sure they didn't say that it's been flying 26years, which is
right about the age of N78BS I believe.

I'm about halfway through (quit laughing). 1500 of a 3000 hour project,
and I've only been at it two years.

--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
alleviated by information and experience."
Veeduber

On Sat, 15 May 2004 04:11:28 GMT, Ernest Christley >
wrote:
>
>That sounds like N78BS, Bernie Schnanowski's bird (just look at me name
>dropping like I know people).
>
>Are you sure they didn't say that it's been flying 26years, which is
>right about the age of N78BS I believe.

Bernie was a member of a Seattle-area EAA Chapter when I joined about
twenty years ago. His plane was flying then, and he'd originally completed
it in New York before he moved to Seattle. The FAA lists the plane as a
1980 model.

The current owner is the builder's son...I think he's named Bernie, as
well.

Ron Wanttaja

Ernest Christley wrote:
>
> Richard Lamb wrote:
> > Earnest,
> >
> > For what it's worth, I just got back from day 1 at SWRFI and
> > there IS a Dyke on display!
> >
> > I have to admit, it is a cool plane.
> > Very different.
> >
> > But it took 26 years to build???
> >
> > (Somebody was goofing off!)
> >
> >
> > Richard
>
> That sounds like N78BS, Bernie Schnanowski's bird (just look at me name
> dropping like I know people).
>
> Are you sure they didn't say that it's been flying 26years, which is
> right about the age of N78BS I believe.
>
> I'm about halfway through (quit laughing). 1500 of a 3000 hour project,
> and I've only been at it two years.
>
> --
> http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/

Yep - Bernie was the guy I talked to.

Nope - he said it only had 12 flying hours on it.


Richard

Ron Wanttaja wrote:
> On Sat, 15 May 2004 04:11:28 GMT, Ernest Christley >
> wrote:
>
>>That sounds like N78BS, Bernie Schnanowski's bird (just look at me name
>>dropping like I know people).
>>
>>Are you sure they didn't say that it's been flying 26years, which is
>>right about the age of N78BS I believe.
>
>
> Bernie was a member of a Seattle-area EAA Chapter when I joined about
> twenty years ago. His plane was flying then, and he'd originally completed
> it in New York before he moved to Seattle. The FAA lists the plane as a
> 1980 model.
>
> The current owner is the builder's son...I think he's named Bernie, as
> well.
>
> Ron Wanttaja

Bernie senior is building a Sonex (I think) right now. Bernie junior
now flies N78BS down around Atlanta.
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
alleviated by information and experience."
Veeduber

Richard Lamb wrote:
> Ernest Christley wrote:
>
>>Richard Lamb wrote:
>>
>>>Earnest,
>>>
>>>For what it's worth, I just got back from day 1 at SWRFI and
>>>there IS a Dyke on display!
>>>
>>>I have to admit, it is a cool plane.
>>>Very different.
>>>
>>>But it took 26 years to build???
>>>
>>>(Somebody was goofing off!)
>>>
>>>
>>>Richard
>>
>>That sounds like N78BS, Bernie Schnanowski's bird (just look at me name
>>dropping like I know people).
>>
>>Are you sure they didn't say that it's been flying 26years, which is
>>right about the age of N78BS I believe.
>>
>>I'm about halfway through (quit laughing). 1500 of a 3000 hour project,
>>and I've only been at it two years.
>>
>>--
>>http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
>
>
> Yep - Bernie was the guy I talked to.
>
> Nope - he said it only had 12 flying hours on it.
>
>
> Richard

Must admit that I haven't a clue as to which bird you saw. Did you get
a tail number? It's definitely not N78BS, though.

--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
alleviated by information and experience."
Veeduber

Ernest Christley wrote:
>
> Richard Lamb wrote:
> > Ernest Christley wrote:
> >
> >>Richard Lamb wrote:
> >>
> >>>Earnest,
> >>>
> >>>For what it's worth, I just got back from day 1 at SWRFI and
> >>>there IS a Dyke on display!
> >>>
> >>>I have to admit, it is a cool plane.
> >>>Very different.
> >>>
> >>>But it took 26 years to build???
> >>>
> >>>(Somebody was goofing off!)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Richard
> >>
> >>That sounds like N78BS, Bernie Schnanowski's bird (just look at me name
> >>dropping like I know people).
> >>
> >>Are you sure they didn't say that it's been flying 26years, which is
> >>right about the age of N78BS I believe.
> >>
> >>I'm about halfway through (quit laughing). 1500 of a 3000 hour project,
> >>and I've only been at it two years.
> >>
> >>--
> >>http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
> >
> >
> > Yep - Bernie was the guy I talked to.
> >
> > Nope - he said it only had 12 flying hours on it.
> >
> >
> > Richard
>
> Must admit that I haven't a clue as to which bird you saw. Did you get
> a tail number? It's definitely not N78BS, though.
>
> --
> http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
> "Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
> alleviated by information and experience."
> Veeduber


Hang on, let me get my camera plugged in....
(busy busy busy)

Ok, she's N131KD.

Like I said, this is the first one I've actually seen in person.
I noticed some changes from the original.
For one thing, the forward underbody is done with glass.
It looks nice that way too.

Richard

On Sat, 15 May 2004 18:05:17 GMT, Richard Lamb >
wrote:
:
:Hang on, let me get my camera plugged in....
:(busy busy busy)
:
:Ok, she's N131KD.
:
:Like I said, this is the first one I've actually seen in person.
:I noticed some changes from the original.
:For one thing, the forward underbody is done with glass.
:It looks nice that way too.

Pretty. http://futurshox.net/viewer.php3?id=1523

Richard Lamb wrote:
>
> Hang on, let me get my camera plugged in....
> (busy busy busy)
>
> Ok, she's N131KD.
>
> Like I said, this is the first one I've actually seen in person.
> I noticed some changes from the original.
> For one thing, the forward underbody is done with glass.
> It looks nice that way too.
>
> Richard

OK. That's Ken Druckenbrodt. Haven't heard much from him, but he first
flew in 2001.

--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
alleviated by information and experience."
Veeduber