Screw clamps or spring tensioned clamps. Which is best?

[Jacques]

I sure wish we could copy and paste from the manual.

here it is

[Doug G.]

I know the recommendation is to always replace and FD says this the question is does it have to be replaced by an FD part or can I go to Roger's "Ace Aircraft Supply."

[Tom Baker]

I know the recommendation is to always replace and FD says this the question is does it have to be replaced by an FD part or can I go to Roger's "Ace Aircraft Supply."

 

Doug, I did answer, and it is on the first page. When they give a description of DIN 985-M5 Regular you can use any DIN 985-M5 Regular nut as a replacement. It doesn't need to come from Flight Design.

[Jim Meade]

If you can screw it on or off with your fingers the insert is toast and no longer functional.

 

That is quite right. And just to be clear if there is too much friction to run it on with your fingers that is also no indication that it meets the torque test. We still need to use the torque wrench.

[Doug G.]

Tom, where do you find that rule? That would make sense, but some have said that if it has a part number you need to get it from FD, or someone sourced or approved by FD.

( I have been told that FD USA doesn't want to be overly fussy about these small parts.) What constitutes a description? For the stabilator it says "stabilator."

A related question - we have had an owner on this site replace the panel screws with thumb screws which ( although handy) do not fit the description in the parts manual. Does this make the plane no longer fit its airworthiness certificate as an SLSA?

[Doug Hereford]

To all,

It seems like everyone already knows the answer to the original question............. Use the clamps that the mfg. says to use. Moral of the story is don't mess with the hoses unless you have a reason to (unsafe condition).

14 CFR part 43.13( does give some help as well. If you think your way is better, best insure that it actually is before you approve for return to service.

 

Doug Hereford

[Jim Meade]

To the administrator or code guru - see Dough Hereford's post above with the smirky smiley. We often see unintended characters pop up in messages. Isn't there a way to filter out whatever is injecting these inaccurate and misleading characters? I don't see it as badly in most other forums.

[Roger Lee]

The emoticons are manually inserted and most use them for fun and to interject a more light hearted side to their post. They're supposed to make you smile. It depends on the forums, but some use them more than others and some forums don't have any at all and,

 

That wouldn't be any fun.

[Jim Meade]

Doug H was citing AC 43-13-1B and it came out as . Maybe he mis-typed it and it displayed that way, but I've seen instances of copying FAA .pdf files and having emoticons pop up where they were not intended.

 

*-)

*_)

 

I can't reproduce what Doug did.

[Ed Cesnalis]

Doug copy and pasted a captital b followed by a close paren

 

These editors feature a group of smileys that use the same text as text smileys, the text that shows as a smiley often exists in Code or things that (are in parens)

 

 

Animated gifs are used as well

 

.

 

 

[Roger Lee]

Jim these emoticons are at the top of your text box in the middle. They can be turned off or on. If you don't see them then you'll have to turn them on.

[Jim Meade]

Charley answered my question. I wish the editor would filter out these kinds of issues, because they frequently come up in copying FARs and other text that involves a parenthesis. Thanks, CT. I suspect what happens is the original text has a line break somewhere or for some other reason inserts a space after the first paren.

[Ed Cesnalis]

Jim,

 

Use the full editor and untick Enable emoticons?

 

 

14 CFR part 43.13( does give some help as w

[Ed Cesnalis]

... I suspect what happens is the original text has a line break somewhere or for some other reason inserts a space after the first paren.

 

The first paren and it's preceding character would create a frownie and there are few frownines so you get few matches on the open paren but the close paren and it's preceding character creates a smiley and there are sundry smileys so it happens frequently on the close paren. :unsure:

[Tom Baker]

On one forum I visit if you type the word "hound" or if it is included in another word, it pops up a big picture of a Basset Hound.

[FastEddieB]

On one forum I visit if you type the word "hound" or if it is included in another word, it pops up a big picture of a Basset Hound.

 

Wow, glad that does not happen here.

 

I can type grey and nothing crazy happens.

[Tom Baker]

That is when it happened, I was suggesting Greyhound as a shipping method. Just like you put in your post.

[Anticept]

Hi Anticept,

 

I remove all those wing root Oetiker clamps and use good fuel injection clamps. FD doesn't have a say on which clamp so you can change it so long as it is an appropriate clamp for that application. I also widen the hole with a Dremel and sanding disk to allow the clamp to go into the hole properly and your right without doing these any wing inspection on the LS is a PITA compared to an SW.

 

That's what i verified with Dave Armando about. The switch to a hose clamp made trailering a lot easier. It is also nice because you can pull the connectors for the wires out between the fuselage and wing, instead of doing acrobatics inside the cockpit.

 

I do want to put one of those split wire sleeves on too, so that the wires don't snag on the aileron rod.

[Jim Meade]

Anticept, you can get your point across without using vulgar language to do so, please.

[Anticept]

Anticept, you can get your point across without using vulgar language to do so, please.

 

Edited, although I do find it odd that a forum section involving maintenance cares about a single profanity, especially since the maintenance industry is very strong with language

[Jim Meade]

Thanks for your understanding. It may be that I'm the only one here who cares about language. I don't know. I know from observations and discussions on many boards that more people care about it than will speak up and express their displeasure. I've seen cases where someone would speak up and the poster of strong language would say, "well, no one has complained before" and others would then say that the appreciated the restraint.

In any event, I appreciate your comments on the clamp question.

[Doug G.]

I second that Jim.

[Runtoeat]

I spoke with Dave Armando at FD as Anticept has done. My conversation with Dave combined with the comments I've read regarding use of the "fuel" type clamp (FD # C9997712 which is also used on oil hoses - see below) indicates to me this clamp provides an effective and secure seal at those hose connections it is currently used on. Due the sliding inner sleeve, this clamp provides a uniform 360 degree pressure to the joint but does have one small transition area where the inner sleeve ends. It is noted the spring clamps have a total 360 uniform surface with no transitions such as this. I asked Dave if the fuel type clamp might be OK for use on the coolant hose connections and he commented that he was not aware of there being larger diameter clamps which would fit the hoses on our engine.

Clamp C9997712.doc

[Tom Baker]

The only problem I have is the last time I ordered some of the fuel clamps they sent me small worm gear clamps, because they couldn't get the correct style.

[Doug G.]

In the Line Maintenance class I just took all the water hose connections on the top of the engine, and the water pump were held with spring clamps. Part number 851 645. (LEAF catalog)