Originally Posted by PETERRAKE
If there's room on the plan I do usually show a section at the aileron. This time it seemed more important to show one at the u/c position. In this instance I think simply labelling them 'full depth' would be sufficient
You might find me more receptive to suggestions if they aren't phrased like orders. I dare say it wasn't intentional, but that is how it reads.
If it were intentional, you know my answer would be along the lines of me not being bothered if you build my designs, you're perfectly at liberty to draw better plans yourself.
Seriously though, sometimes things are so glaringly obvious to the designer that he thinks it's equally obvious to everyone else. Clearly not in this instance.
Originally Posted by loNslo
There should be an end view cross section on the plans which show the spars in relation to the ribs. Even in the plan view, the material thickness should be fairly clear.
Pete--Please don't take everything so personally--there were no orders--I wasn't even talking to you. I was responding to Boogie's previous post and trying to help him find the info he missed by pointing out what he should have been able to find on the plans (which I have not seen, so do not know how complete they are). Though I have yet to see a set of plans which did not show the relationship between spars, leading and trailing edges, and ribs.
As far as your being unreceptive, you must be referring to the problem I spotted on the rudder, at the precise point where it will one day fail. You pooh-poohed the idea of reinforcing the fracture and defended retaining a flaw in this model's construction as unimportant.