Earthstar Forums

> Does this mean that the 57.75" is not valid
> for the J, and there must be
> some other number put into that location?
> If this is the case, then it may
> be hard to recognize one way or the other what to use or not use.

Hey Ron - sorry to be so confusing ...

When I sent the original set of numbers it had the Gull 2K numbers
input (1st Excel sheet) - I later found the J/JT2 numbers (for the
arms) and sent them to you - Then I think you mentioned you were not
able to use the excel format, only works, so I copied the sheet and
before sending put in the J/JT2 numbers into that copy. Then I think
you got the Excel sheet to work in works. So you have two different
sets of numbers for arms - one for the Gull 2K and one for the
J/JT2. I was not sure off the top of my head which set of numbers
you were using, so I was just saying to make sure you have the arm
for the J/JT2 put in, not the Gull 2K (since they were different) - I
just looked it up in the manual and that arm in here says its 57.75
(it would be 59 for the Gull 2K), so it looks like you have the right
arm. To be sure you can always measure, in inches, from the nose of
the plane to the leading edge of the wing.

One other note: - If it is tooooo confusing, just remove that line.
It is just a second point of reference.

I just got both of your messages explaining the spreadsheet. I'm a bit
dense, but now it is clear in my mind. I really appreciate your patience &
time. With what I now have I can send it on to my TG friend.

BTW, I agree with your suggestion to get rid of the Kitfox & get back into
TG'ing, but for the money I should have stayed with what I had. It would be
pretty expensive to get back into one now, especially one like yours (after
reading your flight reports I wouldn't settle for less - unless it was an
Odyssey of course). My neighbors miss it more than I do, commenting on how
nice it flew, and how good it sounded in flight. BOO-HOO!

Thanks again for your help,

Ron Carroll
Independence, Oregon