Subject: LRO digest, Vol 1 #210 - 45 msgs

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 03:04:25 -0500 (EST)

Send LRO mailing list submissions to
	[email-masked]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	[email-masked]

You can reach the person managing the list at
	[email-masked]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of LRO digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Re: B-17 and B-29 (no LR content) (Jeff Bieler)
   2. RE: Equal Tire Balancing at wholesale (Easton Trevor A)
   3. Re: Re: B-17 and B-29 (some LR content) (Gerald)
   4. Re: Re: B-17 and B-29 (some LR content) (Peter Ogilvie)
   5. Re: Re: B-17 and B-29 (some LR content) (Peter Ogilvie)
   6. Re: JackGuard ([email-masked])
   7. Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry) (C. Marin Faure)
   8. Re: JackGuard (Brian Horner)
   9. 3M 5200 sealant (Simon J. Harding)
  10. Re: Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry) (Edit 2)
  11. Re: Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry) (Peter Ogilvie)
  12. Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry) (Dixon Kenner)
  13. Tire work (A. P. (Sandy) Grice)
  14. Re: Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry) (DaveB)
  15. Re: Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry) (DaveB)
  16. Re: 3M 5200 sealant (DaveB)
  17. Re: LRO digest, Vol 1 #206 - 36 msgs (David G. Russell)
  18. NE Galvanizing (David G. Russell)
  19. Re: NE Galvanizing (Alan J. Richer)
  20. Re: NE Galvanizing (Rich Williams)
  21. Carefully worded follow-up to various B-17 threads (Edit 2)
  22. Re: Tire work (Hope Peter)
  23. Re: Tire work (Hope Peter)
  24. Re: Tire work (Hope Peter)
  25. Equal Update (Andrew H. Litkowiak)
  26. Re: NE Galvanizing (Hope Peter)
  27. Re: Spring over (Keith Tanner)
  28. Re: NE Galvanizing (Adrian Redmond)
  29. Re: NE Galvanizing (Hope Peter)
  30. Re: NE Galvanizing (Rich Williams)
  31. Re: Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry) (N Forbes)
  32. Re: NW galvanizing was NE galvanizing. (Peter Ogilvie)
  33. Why pay $55,000 for a D-110!!! (Peter Ogilvie)
  34. Re: Re: Bead unseating??? ([email-masked])
  35. Re: NW galvanizing was NE galvanizing. (Rich Williams)
  36. Re: Re: Bead unseating??? (Hope Peter)
  37. Re: NW galvanizing was NE galvanizing. (Hope Peter)
  38. Re: NE Galvanizing (Hope Peter)
  39. Re: NW galvanizing was NE galvanizing. (Rich Williams)
  40. Re: Carefully worded follow-up to various B-17 threads ([email-masked])
  41. Re: NE Galvanizing (DaveB)
  42. neat products (N Forbes)
  43. Re: NE Galvanizing (N Forbes)
  44. Re: NE Galvanizing (Rich Williams)
  45. Re: NE Galvanizing (Rich Williams)

--__--__--

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 03:40:23 -0800
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: B-17 and B-29 (no LR content)
From: Jeff Bieler <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Without getting into a technical fight of the B-17 versus the B-24, the B-24
was built in greater #'s, flew more missions, dropped more tonnage, served
in more theaters, and actually suffered fewer combat losses then the B-17.

The "Davis wing" did have a lot to due to with the handling issues everyone
is talking about, but it also gave the B-24 it's range and speed advantage
over the B-17.  It was certainly a lot more complicated system and was less
forgiving then the older B-17.

I think the biggest reason the B-24 is viewed as the lesser of the 2
aircraft, is that it was a lot easier for the press and the military
publicity machine to tout the success of an aircraft nicknamed "the Flying
Fortress" then one nicknamed "the Box Car".  With losses as high as they
were for bomber crews, good PR was critical for both military and civilian
moral.  The B-24 was destined to be a bastard step sister.

I guess living in San Diego and spending too much time at the Air and Space
Museum has pumped me full of too much Consolidated PR...

Happy New Year.

Jeff

on 1/1/02 8:32 PM, Peter Ogilvie at [email-masked] wrote:

> 
> From conversations with my Uncles, all B-17 pilots and crew, the B-24 was a
> truck.  It simply wasn't a fun plane to fly so didn't endear itself to the
> pilots.
> 
> Another thing that Marin alluded to was the spar construction of the wing.
> There is a picture taken just after a hit by AA fire, probably an 88, at the
> wing root.  From the looks, the shell passed through and didn't explode but
> took out the main spar.  The wing is just beginning to fold at the root like
> a carrier based Navy plane when the picture was taken.  The photograph was
> taken from almost directly above and must have been snapped seconds after
> the shell hit.  Even though the rest of the plane was intact, doubt that
> anyone got out with the centrifugal forces that a one winged airplane would
> generate.
> 
> As Marin said, a lot of B17's were lost, especially in 1943.  The casualty
> rate was over 10% per mission.  Lost two uncles in Bombers, B-25's not 17's
> though, in 1943.  Run the numbers and that should put Memphis Bell's
> achieving the 25 mission send home in perspective. If it wasn't for the
> P-51, its doubtful that even 1,000 plane Heavy bomber raids, with their huge
> massed fire power, would have succeeded.  The Air Force was forced to stand
> down from raids over Germany in '43 because of the heavy losses.  They
> didn't resume till they had sufficient P-51s to protect the bomber fleet.
> Interestingly enough, even with the protection of night and the primitive
> nature of German Fighter Aircraft radar, the RAF suffered a very high
> casualty rate, also.  Few crews survived beyond 10 missions.  At least the
> attrition rate wasn't as great as in WWI where pilot survival beyond the 2nd
> mission was a miracle.  With the exception of our two most recent conflicts,
> being a member of an aircrew was a good way to be sure your life insurance
> paid off.  Only the submarine service took more casualties, percentage wise,
> than the 8th, believe it was the 8th, Air Force in England.
> 
> Just got through reading Queens Die Proudly.  It was a contemporary book
> about the B-17 crews in the Phillipines and South Pacific at the beginning
> of the war.  Fascinating reading, especially how most of the US air craft
> were destroyed on the ground in the PI the day after Pearl Harbor.
> According to the Author, they'd just gotten the order to disperse from their
> airplane's parade ground formations at Clark AFB and he was walking to his
> plane to take off when the Japanese struck.  Only reason that there were any
> surviving aircraft is that some were dispersed to an outlying field that the
> Japanese, apparently, didn't know about.  Anyway, its a tale of a pitifully
> small number of surviving planes and green crew improvising to fight the
> battle hardened, vastly numerically superior Japanese.  Great praise for the
> B-17 which usually brought its crew back but often so full of holes that the
> planes never flew again.  Apparently there were a lot of B-17's in the
> pipeline to the South Pacific, so reinforcements poured in steadily,
> initially.  Unfortunately, there were not enough to stem the tide and the
> Japanese steadily drove them from base to base till they were forced to fly
> ineffective 12 hour missions out of Australia.
> 
> It didn't take the Japanese long to discover the early model B-17's weakness
> to a frontal assault, BTW.
> 
> Aloha
> Peter O.
> 
> 
>> From: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
>> Reply-To: [email-masked]
>> To: [email-masked]
>> Subject: [lro] Re: B-17 and B-29 (some LR content)
>> Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2002 18:25:09 -0700
>> 
>> 
>> From: "Andrew H. Litkowiak" <[email-masked]>
>> To: [email-masked]
>> Subject: Re: [lro] B-17 and B-29 (no LR content, sorry)
>> Reply-To: [email-masked]
>> 
>>> A substantial part of the B-17's notoriety came from its ability to
>> absorb punishment and still return its crews to base.... The B-17 may be an
>> old design (early-mid 1930's, I believe), but the US had no sturdier
>> airframe in combat during WWII.
>> 
>> The B-29's construction was, overall, far more robust than the B-17s.  The
>> primary thing that gave the B-17 its "always gets home" reputation (not
>> really deserved if you look at the numbers- a large proportion of them
>> didn't get home), was the construction of its wing.  Unlike later bombers
>> during the war, the Model 299 used the same wing construction that Boeing
>> had pioneered in their initial all-metal monoplanes.  These were the
>> Monomail and the Model 247 airliner.  Instead of having the now-tradtional
>> leading and trailing spars with ribs in between with the skin riveted to
>> the spars and ribs, the early Boeing metal planes used a series of
>> bridge-truss components that gave shape and rigidity to the wing.  The
>> downside is that this wing structure was complicated to build and rather
>> heavy.  This limited range and altitude.  The upside in wartime was that
>> because there were so many components making up the wing's frame, shooting
>> holes in some of them didn't necessarily compromise the wing's strength.
>> So damage that might bring down another airplane was tolerated by the B-17.
>> This was a happy accident, by the way.  Boeing didn't use this structure
>> with an idea toward battle-damage survival, it was simply the best wing
>> construction technique they knew of at the time.  The Model 299 was
>> designed in the mid-1930s, before WWII was even an issue (for the US,
>> anyway).
>> 
>> For a current and rather depressing analogy, a more modern wing structure
>> is a bit like the World Trade Center towers.  The strength is in a
>> relatively few number of components, the outer steel columns in the case of
>> the WTC.   The B-17 wing was more like the Empire State Building and other
>> skyscrapers of that era, which have very complex interior frames made up of
>> many interlocking, heavy, steel girders.  While speculation is not worth
>> the electrons it's printed with, it's highly possible a building like the
>> Empire State could have taken a 767 hit (a B-25 did hit it accidentally
>> just after the war) and not collapsed, simply because there are so many
>> structural components holding it up.  The WTC on the other hand, had
>> nothing going for it strength-wise other than the outer shell.  There was
>> no supporting structure inside the outer walls, other than the transverse
>> trusses that supported each acre-size floor.  So when the thin outer
>> "shell" was compromised initially by impact and then by heat, there was
>> nothing left to hold up the weight above the damaged section, and the whole
>> thing collapsed down on itself.
>> 
>> So the B-17, with its complex, heavy, and redundant wing structure, could
>> take some pretty dramatic hits, but there was still enough of that complex
>> bridge struture left to hold things together for awhile.  Most B-17s were
>> lost to fire and/or control loss rather than losing major pieces of
>> structure.
>> 
>> The big problem with the B-24 is that for whatever reason (I don't know
>> much about their construction) they tended to explode when hit.  They also
>> had a totally different kind of wing than the B-17.  It was long, narrow,
>> and had a high lift-over drag ratio.  What this means in lay terms is that
>> aerodynamically, it had a very critical airfoil.  Not very forgiving, in
>> other words.  The B-17, in contrast, had a very basic airfoil and as such
>> was quite forgiving aerodynamically.  The B-24 also utilized (I believe)
>> the spars-and-ribs structure that is common today.  So it did't take much
>> to do major damage, and aerodynamically, it didn't take much damage before
>> the wing's ability to fly was compromised.
>> 
>> The B-29 also used a spars-and-ribs design, but by then Boeing had learned
>> a lot, and the wing was much stronger and more damage resistant than one
>> might think.
>> 
>> I suppose you could make the same B-17/B-24 analogy with the Land Rover.
>> Like the B-17, the Series is made up of a lot of interlocking parts, with a
>> fairly complex frame structure.  In contrast you have the more modern
>> monocoque, or at best "semi-frame" construction of a number of SUVs on the
>> market.  This makes for a lighter vehicle, which means better fuel economy
>> (relatively speaking), better acceleration, better handling, and so forth.
>> On the other hand, I wonder how today's generaton of monocoque SUVs would
>> hold up under hard use over time as compared to the Series Land Rover?
>> 
>> 
>> ________________________
>> C. Marin Faure
>> (original owner)
>> 1973 Land Rover Series III-88
>> 1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
>> Seattle, WA
>> _______________________________________________
>> LRO mailing list
>> [email-masked]
>> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 2
From: Easton Trevor A <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [lro] Equal Tire Balancing at wholesale
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 08:36:58 -0500 
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Andy, you must be getting a great response and a full mailbox as your
address isn't working.
Please contact me off list as I would like to order some.

--__--__--

Message: 3
From: Gerald <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: B-17 and B-29 (some LR content)
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 11:05:28 -0500
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Peter,

Do you mean December 8, 1941 PI time which was Dec 7 Hawaii time? Hard to
understand what they were wafting for if it was 24 hours after Pearl
harbor.

On Tue, 01 Jan 2002 18:32:55 -1000, you wrote:

. . . .
>Just got through reading Queens Die Proudly.  It was a contemporary book 
>about the B-17 crews in the Phillipines and South Pacific at the beginning 
>of the war.  Fascinating reading, especially how most of the US air craft 
>were destroyed on the ground in the PI the day after Pearl Harbor.  
. . . .
>Aloha
>Peter O.
. . . .

--
Gerald
[email-masked]

--__--__--

Message: 4
From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: B-17 and B-29 (some LR content)
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 07:04:31 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The Japanese hit Clark aroundt noon PI time.  It may have been the same day 
but at least 8 hours (not sure what time zone the Phillipines are in) after 
the attack on Pearl.  Somehow it seems to stick that the Japanese struck the 
following day, however I may be mistaken.  The Air Force was so concerned 
about sabotage, they grouped the aircraft together so they could be more 
easily guarded.  Apparently they didn't send up scouting planes or even have 
a CAP over the field.  Can you say STUPID.  Guess the idea that the Japanese 
might attack from the air never occured to them.  The guy that wrote the 
book had spent the morning at the tower waiting for orders and arguing that 
they should get the planes in the air, but to no avail, until well into the 
morning.  His B-17 and crew sat on a ready pad at the end of the runway and 
all were killed when they were strafed.  He happened to be next to a slit 
trench on his way to the airplane and managed to survive.

Aloha
Peter O.

>From: Gerald <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [lro] Re: B-17 and B-29 (some LR content)
>Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 11:05:28 -0500
>
>
>Peter,
>
>Do you mean December 8, 1941 PI time which was Dec 7 Hawaii time? Hard to
>understand what they were wafting for if it was 24 hours after Pearl
>harbor.
>
>On Tue, 01 Jan 2002 18:32:55 -1000, you wrote:
>
>. . . .
> >Just got through reading Queens Die Proudly.  It was a contemporary book
> >about the B-17 crews in the Phillipines and South Pacific at the 
>beginning
> >of the war.  Fascinating reading, especially how most of the US air craft
> >were destroyed on the ground in the PI the day after Pearl Harbor.
>. . . .
> >Aloha
> >Peter O.
>. . . .
>
>--
>Gerald
>[email-masked]
>_______________________________________________
>LRO mailing list
>[email-masked]
>http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

--__--__--

Message: 5
From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: B-17 and B-29 (some LR content)
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 07:49:42 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

The attack on Clark came around noon.  Thought it was noon the following day 
but that may be a Date Line thing.  In any case, the attack was at least 9 
hours after Pearl Harbor.  The Air Force Commanders were so concerned about 
sabotage that they had all the planes concentrated in groups, away from the 
perimeter of the field, so they could be more easily guarded.  Can you say 
'sitting ducks, STUPID.  Apparently they never considered a Japanese air 
raid as they had no scouting patrols out or even a CAP over the field.  
Apparently there was absolutely no warning of the attack.  The author of the 
book had spent the morning at the command center with all the other plane 
commanders while his crew and B-17 sat on a ready pad at the end of the 
runway.  The aircrews had all been arguing to get the planes in the air but 
were kept on the ground.  The order to take off and start running patrols 
had just come down before the attack began.  The author was on his way to 
the plane and just happened to be next to a slit trench when the attack 
began, so he survived.  His plane was destroyed and all the crew killed by 
strafing Zeros.  The attack was devastating and may have destroyed all the 
aircraft at Clark.  In one attack, the Japanese destroyed nearly the entire 
US Air Force in Asia.

Kimmel, the admiral in charge at Pearl, got crucified for an attack that 
Roosevelt knew was coming but failed to pass the information down the line 
to his field commanders.  At Clark, they had ample warning so their complete 
lack of preparedness was unforgivable.  The author glossed over the 
consequences for those responsible.  The book was written early in the war 
and probably heavily censored.  They might have thought it best not to dwell 
on the mistakes.

As far as the merchant marine, keep forgetting about them as a member of the 
military.  They technically aren't but it didn't matter much to a U boat.  
Losses must have been horrific in the first year of the war as convoys, 
radar and air patrols rendered the German submarines largely ineffective by 
1943.

>From: Gerald <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [lro] Re: B-17 and B-29 (some LR content)
>Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 11:05:28 -0500
>
>
>Peter,
>
>Do you mean December 8, 1941 PI time which was Dec 7 Hawaii time? Hard to
>understand what they were wafting for if it was 24 hours after Pearl
>harbor.
>
>On Tue, 01 Jan 2002 18:32:55 -1000, you wrote:
>
>. . . .
> >Just got through reading Queens Die Proudly.  It was a contemporary book
> >about the B-17 crews in the Phillipines and South Pacific at the 
>beginning
> >of the war.  Fascinating reading, especially how most of the US air craft
> >were destroyed on the ground in the PI the day after Pearl Harbor.
>. . . .
> >Aloha
> >Peter O.
>. . . .
>
>--
>Gerald
>[email-masked]
>_______________________________________________
>LRO mailing list
>[email-masked]
>http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

--__--__--

Message: 6
From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 14:00:47 EST
Subject: Re: [lro] JackGuard
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Jean-Leon Morin <[email-masked]> posted"

<<WHY does this show up AFTER christmas?
looks very nice... Unfortunately it looks a bit too much like a RIFLE case
for suburban use...>>

Is this like carrying a Thompson in a violin case?

Would you need a to wear a suit with wide pinstripes and a black shirt and 
tie?

Very retro 30s look for a Land Rover guy.

Paul Donohue
1965 Land Rover 109
Denver

--__--__--

Message: 7
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 11:06:48 -0700
To: Dixon Kenner <[email-masked]>
From: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>Mr. Kenner wrote:
>Interesting message on wing design and such.  I know little about the
>American bomber fleet, being more familiar with the Lancaster and Halifax
>and such.

I realize this is more suited for an aviation list of some sort, but there
seems to be some interest here in the subject, so I will post this.  Please
skip it if you have no interest in the subject.

As is always the case in a war, the equipment designed before and during
the first part of WWII was really designed to fight the last war.  So the
B-17 and B-24 were fitted with multiple machine guns that the Army Air
Corps figured would be more than sufficient to ward off any fighter
attacks.  What they hadn't reckoned with, of course, was that the fighters
these bombers would encounter were a far cry from the fighters of the
previous twenty years.  While the occasional fighter was shot down, all the
bomber turrets really accomplished was to sometimes keep the fighters at
bay.

As it turned out, the only way to combat fighters effectively was to use
other fighters, so it wasn't until later in the war when the development of
the drop tank allowed longer range fighters like the P-51, P-47, P-38 and I
assume the later versions of the Spitfire to accompany the bombers to the
target and back that the bombers had a truly effective defense against
fighters.  But not against flack, of course, which continued to take its
toll.

The B-29 had a totally different concept in self-protection.  It had, in
effect, the first "computerized" fire control.  The turrets themselves were
small and unmanned, so they could move very fast.  Remote gunsights were
fitted in Plexiglas blisters at various locations around the plane.  A kid
called the CFC (central fire control) gunner sat with his head in an upper
blister so he had a panoramic view of what was happening.  He had a
gunsight of his own, but he also had a control panel with which he could
assign any turret, or combination of turrets, to any gunsight on the plane.
All the gunners themselves had to do was aim their little sight at a target
and track it.  The gunsight determined speed and distance and automatically
determined the proper aiming for all the guns in the turret or turrets
assigned to that gunsight.  The B-29's CFC system was designed and built by
General Electric.  There was a tail gunner, but even he too used a remote
gunsight to aim and fire the two or three guns in the tail turret.

But the B-29's real defense was altitude and speed.  It flew higher than
any other WWII bomber, and it flew faster than most of the fighters that
were up against it.  Not until the very end of the war did the Japanese
develop  fighters that could catch a B-29, but by then their production
capability had been almost totally destroyed by the same planes the
fighters were designed to shoot down.  Unlike the Germans, whose fighter
production at the end of the war was higher than at any time during or
before the war, the Japanese production capabilities were pretty much wiped
out.  The Germans' problem was they had plenty of planes, but they didn't
have any more effective pilots.  The Japanese had the pilots, but they
didn't have the planes.

At high speeds and altitudes, the bombing accuracy of the B-29 crews was
terrible.  Lots of times they were far above the clouds and had to bomb by
radar, which made the accuracy even worse.  A new bomber commander in the
Pacific, General Curtiss LeMay, ordered most of the guns stripped off the
B-29s so they could carry a heavier load and sent the planes in at
altitudes of 7,000 feet or so.  They mostly went in at night, but the
bombing finally became accurate.  The price was that the planes became
extremely vulnerable to anti-aircraft fire and fighters.  That's when the
B-29s started getting shot up pretty bad, and the inherent strength in the
design became apparent.

Once the Marines took Iwo Jima, the B-29s finally had fighter protection in
the form of the P-51s that were based there, and daylight bombing began
again, although still from relatively low altitudes.  But the missions were
extremely long.  One P-51 pilot told me that to get an idea of what escort
fighter service was like, sit in a hard, uncomfortable chair for six or
seven hours without moving.  The P-51 ground crews often had to lift the
pilots out of their planes, they were that stiff and numb when they got
back.

One of the most honest books about flying B-17s is called "The Fall of
Fortresses" by Elmer Bendiner.  I don't know if it's still in print.  I
bought my copy in the early 1980s.  He participated in one of the early
Schweinfurt raids, long before fighter protection, and his description of
that flight, and of being on a bomber crew at that time in general, runs
counter to the romanticized pictures painted by Hollywood and popular
legend.  He describes being puzzled during the mission by the bright,
dotted lines on the ground along their path all the way back to the horizon
until he realized these were the burning B-17s that had been shot down by
the German fighters.

During an interview, a B-17 crewman asked me if I knew the feeling you have
in a car when you know you're about to be hit and there's nothing you can
do about it.  He said that's the way you felt during an entire mission.
When I asked him how he managed to hold up for hours feeling this way, he
replied that it's like being hung.  If you hang long enough, he said, you
get used to it.

When you talk to WWII vets, as I'm sure many of you have, or you read
honest accounts of what they endured, one wonders if we today with our
current values and attitudes could have accomplished what they did.  The
kids who fought that war truly deserve the label they've been give as "the
greatest generation."

Again, sorry for the long off-topic post, but I get the impression a number
of you are interested in airplanes and history, so I took the liberty of
sending this to the list as well as the person who prompted me to write it.

________________________
C. Marin Faure
  (original owner)
  1973 Land Rover Series III-88
  1991 Range Rover Vogue SE
   Seattle, WA

--__--__--

Message: 8
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 11:29:11 -0800
Subject: Re: [lro] JackGuard
From: Brian Horner <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Yeah - it is the Bonnie & Clyde Hi-Lift case but it would be nice if you
planned on having your jack inside the vehicle instead of outside.

Brian

On 1/2/02 11:00 AM, "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]> wrote:

> 
> Jean-Leon Morin <[email-masked]> posted"
> 
> <<WHY does this show up AFTER christmas?
> looks very nice... Unfortunately it looks a bit too much like a RIFLE case
> for suburban use...>>
> 
> 
> Is this like carrying a Thompson in a violin case?
> 
> Would you need a to wear a suit with wide pinstripes and a black shirt and
> tie?
> 
> Very retro 30s look for a Land Rover guy.
> 
> Paul Donohue
> 1965 Land Rover 109
> Denver
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
> 

------------------------
http://www.roverme.org
"Land Rover community, links and email services."

--__--__--

Message: 9
From: "Simon J. Harding" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 11:18:06 -0800
Subject: [lro] 3M 5200 sealant
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I sealed my rain gutters with this stuff a few days ago and thought I'd post
a couple quick tips for anyone considering this as a winter project.  Don't
do it.  It has to be applied in temps over 40 degrees F.  I have a propane
heater in my garage, but its small and just takes the edge off the cold.
The 5200 is fairly thick out of the cauling tube, so hard to pump, in the
cold.  It also took longer to set.  On the other hand, the stuff is gooey,
and flattening it into a nice fillet in the bottom of the gutter was
difficult, and might be harder in warmer temps.  I ended up using about a
dozeen latex gloves.  On the bright side, it cleaned up easily with
kerosene.  It also set hard to seal the holes drilled through the gutters
where my roof rack used to be bolted down.  We'll see how it holds up.
Hope all had a nice holiday.  Go Ducks!
Simon

--__--__--

Message: 10
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 20:49:48 +0100
From: Edit 2 <[email-masked]>
Organization: Channel 6 Television Denmark
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Does anyone (over there?) know why so many Lancaster crews from England
were sent to Canada for training? I believe also that some of them
actually flew missions under the insignia/command of the Royal Canadian
Air Force.

This was the case for my elder brothers father, who was a policeman from
Lancashire, but joined up and ended up under RCAF command - until he was
shot down and killed in 44.

I have always wondered why there was this transatlantic traffic?

Best regards

Adrian Redmond

---------------------------------------------------
CHANNEL 6 TELEVISION DENMARK
Foerlevvej 6, Mesing, DK-8660  Skanderborg  Denmark
---------------------------------------------------
telephone (office)                  +45 86 57 22 66
telephone (home)                    +45 86 57 22 64
telefacsimile                       +45 86 57 24 46
mobile GSM                          +45 40 54 22 66
e-mail                       [email-masked]
---------------------------------------------------
Visit our homepages!                www.channel6.dk
---------------------------------------------------

--__--__--

Message: 11
From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry)
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 10:03:25 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

It could have been the weather though can't believe a Canadian winter would 
be so much better than England's.  The German airforce used to send their 
entire complement of F-104 pilots to Arizona to fly in the winter.  Flight 
time was so limited by weather in Germany, the pilots weren't getting enough 
time in the air to stay proficient.  Winter accident rate was unacceptable 
till they came up with the idea of short training stints under better 
weather conditions.

Can't answer for your Uncle on why he was exiled to the RCAF.  My dad joined 
the RCAF in 1940 but transitioned to the USAAF along with their Spitfires 
soon after the US entered the war.  Possibly, GB looked at the colonies as 
just an extension of the home force so didn't much care if they flew as 
RCAF, RAAF, or whatever, as long as they flew.

Aloha
Peter O.

>From: Edit 2 <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: Re: [lro] Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry)
>Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 20:49:48 +0100
>
>
>Does anyone (over there?) know why so many Lancaster crews from England
>were sent to Canada for training? I believe also that some of them
>actually flew missions under the insignia/command of the Royal Canadian
>Air Force.
>
>This was the case for my elder brothers father, who was a policeman from
>Lancashire, but joined up and ended up under RCAF command - until he was
>shot down and killed in 44.
>
>I have always wondered why there was this transatlantic traffic?
>
>Best regards
>
>Adrian Redmond
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>CHANNEL 6 TELEVISION DENMARK
>Foerlevvej 6, Mesing, DK-8660  Skanderborg  Denmark
>---------------------------------------------------
>telephone (office)                  +45 86 57 22 66
>telephone (home)                    +45 86 57 22 64
>telefacsimile                       +45 86 57 24 46
>mobile GSM                          +45 40 54 22 66
>e-mail                       [email-masked]
>---------------------------------------------------
>Visit our homepages!                www.channel6.dk
>---------------------------------------------------
>_______________________________________________
>LRO mailing list
>[email-masked]
>http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

--__--__--

Message: 12
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 15:19:17 -0500 (EST)
From: Dixon Kenner <[email-masked]>
To: "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]>
cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry)
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On Wed, 2 Jan 2002, C. Marin Faure wrote:

> One of the most honest books about flying B-17s is called "The Fall of
> Fortresses" by Elmer Bendiner.  I don't know if it's still in print.  I

An interesting book contrasting these planes is "B-17, B-29 & Lancaster"
by Stewart Wilson, 1996.  He argues that while the B-29 ws the ultimate
heavy bomber of the era, but the Lancaster was the finest strategic bomber
based on payload/range.  Of course, differing operational parameters makes
comparisons difficult.  It is akin to cntrasting aircraft in Europe (high
level because of flak etc) to the Pacific (low level) or various Land
Rover designs where some like functional vehicles, and others prefer a
more comfy, climate controlled ride.

--__--__--

Message: 13
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 15:34:39 -0500
To: [email-masked]
From: "A. P. (Sandy) Grice" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Tire work
Reply-To: [email-masked]

"Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]> wrote:

>Used the High Lift with the front of the 109 as leverage.  Usually can 
>unseat the bead on the first try.

WRT the current thread on tire swaps, has anyone tried this technique that
I read about years ago:  Use a length of vacuum tubing from the Schrader
valve (with the inards/valving removed) to a convenient vacuum port on the
engine.  A few minutes and the tire bead pops free - supposedly....

Of course, then there is the issue of reseating the bead.  On The Learning
Channel's history of four-by-fours (which had a good 15 min on Rovers, BTW)
the use of starting ether by glacier drivers seemed to be the most fun....

Cheers

	*-----"jeep may be famous, LAND-ROVER is legendary"----*
	|                 A. P. "Sandy" Grice                  |
	|    The Rover Owners' Association of Virginia, Ltd    |
	|     1633 Melrose Parkway, Norfolk, VA 23508-1730     |
	*------ 1972 Series III 88"------ 1996 Discovery-------*

--__--__--

Message: 14
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:48:27 -0800 (PST)
From: DaveB <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry)
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--- "C. Marin Faure" <[email-masked]> wrote:
 one wonders if we today with
> our
> current values and attitudes could have accomplished what they did. 

Which values and attitudes? The ones that could only exist in a free
and democratic country? Hopefully we won't have to, but today's
military is stronger, smarter, and faster. I'd be quicker to question
whether some of our politicians have the stomach for it. 

"We today" wouldn't be using 1930's and 40's equipment. Did WWII jeeps
even have synchro gearboxes? 

Could WWII's kids have done what Amercian Revolution soldiers did,
under the same conditions? 

Ask a stupid question...

=====
DaveB
Arlington, VA
"GreenHELL" '72 SIII 88"- "Unstoppable"
"Red Square" '60 SII 109"- "Purrs like a (leaky) kitten" 

Please ignore the following words from our sponsor:
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

--__--__--

Message: 15
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:51:11 -0800 (PST)
From: DaveB <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry)
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--- Dixon Kenner <[email-masked]> wrote:
 various Land
> Rover designs where some like functional vehicles, 

So they buy ISUZUS...sad...

=====
DaveB
Arlington, VA
"GreenHELL" '72 SIII 88"- "Unstoppable"
"Red Square" '60 SII 109"- "Purrs like a (leaky) kitten" 

Please ignore the following words from our sponsor:
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

--__--__--

Message: 16
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 12:56:03 -0800 (PST)
From: DaveB <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] 3M 5200 sealant
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--- "Simon J. Harding" <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> I sealed my rain gutters with this stuff a few days ago

I sealed my gutters by filling them partway with West System marine
epoxy. It helped alot, but I still get some water in. not as much
though. Stole the idea from Bill Adams so try it at your own risk.

=====
DaveB
Arlington, VA
"GreenHELL" '72 SIII 88"- "Unstoppable"
"Red Square" '60 SII 109"- "Purrs like a (leaky) kitten" 

Please ignore the following words from our sponsor:
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

--__--__--

Message: 17
Date: Wed,  2 Jan 2002 17:13:47 -0500
From: "David G. Russell" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Re: LRO digest, Vol 1 #206 - 36 msgs
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On 12/30/01 at 3:03, [email-masked] wrote:

> Message: 3
> From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Subject: Re: [lro] now B-17 (now 36% more LR content!)
> Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 07:18:54 -0800
> Reply-To: [email-masked]
> 
> Rovers North catalogs - who keeps 'em year after year?

I have some from the late 80's.

-David

--__--__--

Message: 18
Date: Wed,  2 Jan 2002 17:20:30 -0500
From: "David G. Russell" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] NE Galvanizing
Reply-To: [email-masked]

On 12/30/01 at 3:03, Paul Donohue wrote:

> AJR posted:
> 
> > << the People's Republic of Massachusetts has driven all of the
> > small galvanizers out of business  >>
> 
> Al:
> 
> As I recall, you are not far from New Hampshire.  Are there no
> galvanizers there, or possibly in far-away Rhode Island?
> 
> Paul Donohue
> 1965 Land Rover 109
> Denver Colorado

None in NH, but I was given these names for MA, FWIW:

There are two galvanizers in Everett Duncan 617-389-8440 and Bay 
State 617-389-0671. Bay State also powdercoats. The ultimate finish 
would be galvanized and powder coated. You will have to sand blast 
the bumper before having it coated.

If anyone has more info, please let me know.

-David

--__--__--

Message: 19
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 15:12:51 -0800 (PST)
From: "Alan J. Richer" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Call them and ask for their minimums...I think you'll
have a shock.

    aj"Been there, called both...1K?!?!?"r

--- "David G. Russell" <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> On 12/30/01 at 3:03, Paul Donohue wrote:
> 
> > AJR posted:
> > 
> > > << the People's Republic of Massachusetts has
> driven all of the
> > > small galvanizers out of business  >>
> > 
> > Al:
> > 
> > As I recall, you are not far from New Hampshire. 
> Are there no
> > galvanizers there, or possibly in far-away Rhode
> Island?
> > 
> > Paul Donohue
> > 1965 Land Rover 109
> > Denver Colorado
> 
> None in NH, but I was given these names for MA,
> FWIW:
> 
> There are two galvanizers in Everett Duncan
> 617-389-8440 and Bay 
> State 617-389-0671. Bay State also powdercoats. The
> ultimate finish 
> would be galvanized and powder coated. You will have
> to sand blast 
> the bumper before having it coated.
> 
> If anyone has more info, please let me know.
> 
> -David
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

=====
Please ignore the following advertising.....
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

--__--__--

Message: 20
From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 16:00:32 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hey - at least you guys can get galvy work done!

The closest glavy shops to the Seattle area are 3 hours away in Portland, OR
and Vancouver, BC and 5 hours away in Spokane, WA.

The galvy outfit here in town will not do anything related to automobiles
whatsoever.  I tried to have the cappings and windshield frame done,
explaining that they were not integral to the operation of the vehicle and
they simply didn't care.

The minimums weren't bad but I guess that doesn't matter.

Rich

----- Original Message -----
From: Alan J. Richer <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing

Call them and ask for their minimums...I think you'll
have a shock.

    aj"Been there, called both...1K?!?!?"r

--- "David G. Russell" <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> On 12/30/01 at 3:03, Paul Donohue wrote:
>
> > AJR posted:
> >
> > > << the People's Republic of Massachusetts has
> driven all of the
> > > small galvanizers out of business  >>
> >
> > Al:
> >
> > As I recall, you are not far from New Hampshire.
> Are there no
> > galvanizers there, or possibly in far-away Rhode
> Island?
> >
> > Paul Donohue
> > 1965 Land Rover 109
> > Denver Colorado
>
> None in NH, but I was given these names for MA,
> FWIW:
>
> There are two galvanizers in Everett Duncan
> 617-389-8440 and Bay
> State 617-389-0671. Bay State also powdercoats. The
> ultimate finish
> would be galvanized and powder coated. You will have
> to sand blast
> the bumper before having it coated.
>
> If anyone has more info, please let me know.
>
> -David
> _______________________________________________
> LRO mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

=====
Please ignore the following advertising.....
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
[email-masked]
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 21
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 02:23:14 +0100
From: Edit 2 <[email-masked]>
Organization: Channel 6 Television Denmark
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [lro] Carefully worded follow-up to various B-17 threads
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Permit me, at the risk of ruffling a few (US) feathers, to join the
off-topic about previous generations bravery.

Evaluating the feelings, ideals and values of the past - especially when
dealing with one's own countrymen - is very difficult - after all, there
is only the recollections of the survivors to call upon.

History - especially the history of one's own country - is
understandably coloured by the values of pride, honour, courage, and
cause which the particular nation holds dear, and reinforced, over
generations, by the media, hollywood, literature, journalism, and every
family's "what did you do in the last war grandpa?" stories.

The further back in history we go, the less choice the PBI (Poor Bloody
Infantry) had about their participation. Many volunteered without
knowing what they were signing up for, having only limited information
about the hooros of the front until they got there and acquired an
understanding first hand. It is only in later generations such as ours,
that the "luxury" of informed, educated political choice" has arisen.

That is not to say that previous warriors were not brave. Just that the
further back in time we go, the less opportunity they had for making
their choices. Histoprical literature is woven with the tales of the
humble survivors honouring their corangeous dead - it's part of every
culture. Just how brave they were, just how scared s*itless and shocked
when they discovered their now unchangeable role in a greater game
controlled by others, is less documented.

My guess is that most were scared s*i*less - on both sides of every
conflict since Agincourt and before.

It is impossible to rationally compare the bravery of conscripts with
the courage of professional soldiers who have volunteered - usually in
peacetime, and undergone a long and detailled initiation in their
possible fate on the battlefield at a time when they could still change
their course.

It think it is easier to evaluate the bravery of professionals like
search & rescue crews or firefighters, whose professional experience and
training tells them that the situation into which they are about to
plunge themselves to save the lives of immediately recogniseable others
is everything but safe. How the men of the NYFD engine companies held
such thoughts down and still climbed the stairs of the WTC beats me
(even though I grew up in a family of firefighters and law enforcement).

I don't mean to belittle or dishonour those who gave their lives for the
likes of us, just to try and describe how hard it is to be objective
when writing about or reporting such actions - either in terms of
contemporary journalisim or with the cooler hindsight and objectivity of
the historian.

Thgis is important, because labelling anyone as brave and courageous
also helps to undervalue the terminology when it is applied to those
acts of true bravery which deserve it. Not that i have an answer to this
delicate question, but I do see that there is a question which needs
asking sometimes.

Look at it form the other perspective - that of the "other side" - in
the first reports from the Arab world regarding the events of 9-11, the
highjackers were heralded as brave and courageous - though more recent
reports seem to indicate, that many of them didn't even know what fate
the day had in store for their lives until it was too late.

Not a value judgement by6 any intention - but maybe many of our own
glorious dead faced the same rude awakening only minutes before their
landing craft, parachutes or troop carriers dropped them into enemy fire
to face an end far from glorious. Maybe all the courageous had one-way
tickets.

<OK Nomex on, but think about it...>

My Centre diff lamp is still playingup :-)

Adrian Redmond

---------------------------------------------------
CHANNEL 6 TELEVISION DENMARK
Foerlevvej 6, Mesing, DK-8660  Skanderborg  Denmark
---------------------------------------------------
telephone (office)                  +45 86 57 22 66
telephone (home)                    +45 86 57 22 64
telefacsimile                       +45 86 57 24 46
mobile GSM                          +45 40 54 22 66
e-mail                       [email-masked]
---------------------------------------------------
Visit our homepages!                www.channel6.dk
---------------------------------------------------

--__--__--

Message: 22
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Tire work
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 19:38:50 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> the use of starting ether by glacier drivers seemed to be the most fun....
> 

BTDT no t-shirt just a medical bill
Pete and yes the eyebrows do grow back ;-0

--__--__--

Message: 23
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Tire work
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 19:38:53 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> the use of starting ether by glacier drivers seemed to be the most fun....
> 

BTDT no t-shirt just a medical bill
Pete and yes the eyebrows do grow back ;-0

--__--__--

Message: 24
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Tire work
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 19:52:22 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> BTDT 

Hmmm, I only sent this once, but got two copies back 
P

--__--__--

Message: 25
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 22:01:21 -0600
From: "Andrew H. Litkowiak" <[email-masked]>
To: LandCruiser List <[email-masked]>, Land Rover List
  <[email-masked]>
Subject: [lro] Equal Update
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Hello All,

So far, we've got 125 bags to be ordered. A number of orders came in
today.

I plan to place my bulk order on Friday, so post me with your needs
ASAP.

The money is starting to dribble in. If you committed to this, please
send me your check. I know I'll be left with some extra bags, but I'm
hoping it won't be too many.

Andy

--__--__--

Message: 26
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 19:54:51 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> The closest glavy shops to the Seattle area are 3 hours away in Portland,
OR
> and Vancouver, BC and 5 hours away in Spokane, WA.
>
> The galvy outfit here in town will not do anything related to automobiles
> whatsoever.

Really??? One of the guys in the PCRC told me that the guy in seattle would
do our stuff and gave club members a good deal.
It was either Nick E. or Dave W. that told me.  We were looking at grommits
roofrack on the ferry ride after the Guy Fawkes bon fire in November.
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 27
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 21:01:42 -0500
To: [email-masked]
From: Keith Tanner <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Spring over
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I cannot WAIT to see photos. If I'd known you were this far, I would have 
dropped by while I was in Ottawa! Not that I had time...

Keith, back in CO
------------
Keith's page de home:
    http://keith.miata.net
------------

--__--__--

Message: 28
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 05:05:42 +0100
From: Adrian Redmond <[email-masked]>
Organization: Channel 6 Television Denmark
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Do they celebrate Guy Fawkes in the USA? I thought England was the only
country in the world to celebrate this "terrorist" (or was he a freedom
fighter?)... :-)

Adrian Redmond

---------------------------------------------------
CHANNEL 6 TELEVISION DENMARK
Foerlevvej 6, Mesing, DK-8660  Skanderborg  Denmark
---------------------------------------------------
telephone (office)                  +45 86 57 22 66
telephone (home)                    +45 86 57 22 64
telefacsimile                       +45 86 57 24 46
mobile GSM                          +45 40 54 22 66
e-mail                       [email-masked]
---------------------------------------------------
Visit our homepages!                www.channel6.dk
---------------------------------------------------

--__--__--

Message: 29
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 20:12:22 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Do they celebrate Guy Fawkes in the USA? I thought England was the only
> country in the world to celebrate this "terrorist" (or was he a freedom
> fighter?)... :-)
>

The Pacific Coast Rover Club, Seattle branch does.  Seems to be something
about fire that really gets the PCRC going.  Not sure what exactly yet, but
I was chastened(sp) for not bringing fire would to the off road event in
December.  Seems the club can be tracked not by the marks left from the mud
terrains on the rovers, but by the ashes of it's last bon fire.
Fawkes night was pretty cool...well damn cold actually.  But had a big huge
fire on the beach.  Someone built a life size Fawkes manican to toss on the
fire and there were even fireworks.
Pete
www.aloharovers.com

--__--__--

Message: 30
From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 20:17:34 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Pete,

Maybe things have changed since I made the phone calls around town.

>From what I've been able to determine....Gord'ns got a contact at a local
outfit so what happens is that a part (bulkhead, door frame, chassis,
whatever...) goes down to Portland and gets dunked in the stripping tank.
Then it comes back up to Seattle and is galvy'd through Gord'ns contact.
It's pretty pricey and the process goes at a snail's pace.

I've also heard that the outfit up in BC does everything (strip and galvy)
in the same shop and their turnaround is about a week or so.

My 1960 had absolutely zero rust save for a pinhole in one footwell so I
figured that since it hasn't rusted yet, and I don't live in a 'salty' part
of the country, and that it will get better care now than it has ever had, I
just decided to sandblast and paint steel parts and didn't bother with any
new galvy on my 109 project.

Then again, Gord'ns mantra seems to be that 'if it's steel - galvanize
it'...

Rich

----- Original Message -----
From: Hope Peter <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2002 7:54 PM
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing

> The closest glavy shops to the Seattle area are 3 hours away in Portland,
OR
> and Vancouver, BC and 5 hours away in Spokane, WA.
>
> The galvy outfit here in town will not do anything related to automobiles
> whatsoever.

Really??? One of the guys in the PCRC told me that the guy in seattle would
do our stuff and gave club members a good deal.
It was either Nick E. or Dave W. that told me.  We were looking at grommits
roofrack on the ferry ride after the Guy Fawkes bon fire in November.
Pete
_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
[email-masked]
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

--__--__--

Message: 31
From: "N Forbes" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: B-17's (no LR content again...sorry)
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 04:24:12 +0000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I suspect it had to do with space and resources and not having the trainees 
shot down.

My Grandfather was in the RCAF but flew with the RAF, mainly as a Pathfinder 
navigator.

Niall Forbes
66 IIa 88SW - The Red Zit
Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
The Nova Scotian Rover - http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/forbes/intro.htm

"See the happy moron,
He doesn't give a damn.
I wish I were a moron.
My God! Perhaps I am!"
--author unknown

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

--__--__--

Message: 32
From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] NW galvanizing was NE galvanizing.
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 18:25:03 -1000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Check with Gord'n Perrott.  I believe he told me he takes his galvanizing to 
Portland to get it done.  Gord'ns motto is 'if its steel, galvanize it.'  
Believe he said he collects a bunch of stuff from people and then loads up 
when he has to go South.

Peter, have you checked in with Gord'n???  I was in seventh heaven at his 
place.  He has a garage at the back of his house in a small lot housing 
area.  The front yard is lined up with interesting Rover's of all kinds and 
he uses Rover parts for lawn decorations.  Had a very nicely galvanized 
bonnet frame that he was using as a temporary trellis.  Nice guy, spent 
about an hour talking with him.  Also met the fellow that has an Ingrid 38 
as well as the Rover and put the 'Bloody Knuckles Pub' badge a couple of 
years ago.  He's been working out of Canada and doesn't have an email in the 
woods so hasn't been on the list much lately.  If my wife would have let me, 
would have gone back to his shop and spent the vacation playing with Rovers.

Aloha
Peter

>From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
>Reply-To: [email-masked]
>To: <[email-masked]>
>Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing
>Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 19:54:51 -0800
>
>
> > The closest glavy shops to the Seattle area are 3 hours away in 
>Portland,
>OR
> > and Vancouver, BC and 5 hours away in Spokane, WA.
> >
> > The galvy outfit here in town will not do anything related to 
>automobiles
> > whatsoever.
>
>Really??? One of the guys in the PCRC told me that the guy in seattle would
>do our stuff and gave club members a good deal.
>It was either Nick E. or Dave W. that told me.  We were looking at grommits
>roofrack on the ferry ride after the Guy Fawkes bon fire in November.
>Pete
>_______________________________________________
>LRO mailing list
>[email-masked]
>http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.

--__--__--

Message: 33
From: "Peter Ogilvie" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 19:18:36 -1000
Subject: [lro] Why pay $55,000 for a D-110!!!
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Out of the blue, got an email from MVS (Military Vehicle Spares) trying to 
sell me a bull dozer or something.  Don't know why they picked this moment 
to respond as they didn't get back to me when I was thinking of buying a 
lightweight.

Unfortunately, no more lightweights though they do have a few Series 3 109s. 
  Went through their list of available Rovers.  D90's from 4250GBP, all with 
2.5 N/A diesels, a 110 for 5,000 GBP and last but not least, 127 amublances 
for 7,500GBP with v-8s and less than 30,000 miles.

At times like this you want to strangle the DOT and EPA regulators.

Aloha
Peter O.

WWW.militaryvehiclespares.com is their Website

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

--__--__--

Message: 34
From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 00:23:50 EST
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: Bead unseating???
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

In a message dated 1/1/02 9:20:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> The only thing that I can think of doing is cutting the tire off at the bead 
> with a sawzall and then carefully sawing through the bead.  Anyone have a 
> better idea??????
> 
> 
> 

A Tire sledge has an end to it much like a very fat mattox. A regular sledge 
will not work, as it spreads the impact out onto the sidewall, with 
catastrophic results to the effectiveness. If you go to a sledge there is 
generally available a small one at about 5-6 lb. It is better to try with a 
larger one at about 10-12 lb. Another possibility is a gigantic slide hammer 
at about 15 lb. sliding weight and a business end much smaller than the 
conventional sledge types.

You stand across the rim from the point you are attacking and hit very much 
like splitting wood. Impacting the rim usually will ding the rim back and is 
a bad practice. Unless you have a large supply of rims.

Zack

--__--__--

Message: 35
From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] NW galvanizing was NE galvanizing.
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 21:29:03 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Check with Gord'n Perrott.  I believe he told me he takes his galvanizing
to
> Portland to get it done.  Gord'ns motto is 'if its steel, galvanize it.'
> Believe he said he collects a bunch of stuff from people and then loads up
> when he has to go South.

Yep - he tries to do this in 'bulk'.  The Portland run is to take everything
to the stripper.  Then everything comes back up to Seattle somewhere to get
galvy'd through a contact he has.

> Peter, have you checked in with Gord'n???  I was in seventh heaven at his
> place.  He has a garage at the back of his house in a small lot housing
> area.  The front yard is lined up with interesting Rover's of all kinds
and
> he uses Rover parts for lawn decorations.  Had a very nicely galvanized
> bonnet frame that he was using as a temporary trellis.  Nice guy, spent
> about an hour talking with him.  Also met the fellow that has an Ingrid 38
> as well as the Rover and put the 'Bloody Knuckles Pub' badge a couple of
> years ago.  He's been working out of Canada and doesn't have an email in
the
> woods so hasn't been on the list much lately.  If my wife would have let
me,
> would have gone back to his shop and spent the vacation playing with
Rovers.

Gord'ns definately one of the nicest guys around.  A true NO BS kind of guy
and very talented with LRs.  We're lucky to have him in the area.

Rich

--__--__--

Message: 36
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] Re: Bead unseating???
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 21:27:27 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> The only thing that I can think of doing is cutting the tire off at the
bead
> with a sawzall and then carefully sawing through the bead.  Anyone have a
> better idea??????

Peter, I will send you one of my curved hilift base plates on Friday if you
like.  Only a bucks worth of steel so no worry.
pETE

--__--__--

Message: 37
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] NW galvanizing was NE galvanizing.
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 21:28:45 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Peter, have you checked in with Gord'n???  I was in seventh heaven at his 
> place

Met him a couple times.  Will get him to set up my Salisbury with and ARB.
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 38
From: "Hope Peter" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 21:29:25 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> From what I've been able to determine....Gord'ns got a contact at a local
> outfit so what happens is that a part (bulkhead, door frame, chassis,
> whatever...) goes down to Portland and gets dunked in the stripping tank.
> Then it comes back up to Seattle and is galvy'd through Gord'ns contact.
> It's pretty pricey and the process goes at a snail's pace.

Ahhh, didn't know all the details.
Pete

--__--__--

Message: 39
From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] NW galvanizing was NE galvanizing.
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 21:37:52 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Met him a couple times.  Will get him to set up my Salisbury with and ARB.
> Pete

Get in line pal.......he he he 

- Rich

--__--__--

Message: 40
From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 00:51:36 EST
Subject: Re: [lro] Carefully worded follow-up to various B-17 threads
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

In a message dated 1/2/02 5:19:37 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> Not that i have an answer to this
> delicate question, but I do see that there is a question which needs
> asking sometimes.
> 
> 

I'll Essay this dangerous ground, but still, I'll "tread lightly"

I was attending a class, and the subject of putting out transformer fires 
came up.  The instructor had put out many, usually by spraying them with 
water from a handline. We discussed the safety of spraying water on 12 
kilovolts. Needless to say, we were somewhat reluctant to put it to the test 
personally. We asked the instructor why he'd do that, given the low risk 
associated with letting them burn. His reply was simple. "It's because we're 
firemen I guess, and that's what we do." 

I know that the safety of spraying these fires is quantifiable, but the 
answer is the key. We're Land Rover Geeks, and its what we do.

Zack

--__--__--

Message: 41
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 22:04:14 -0800 (PST)
From: DaveB <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing
To: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]

--- Rich Williams <[email-masked]> wrote:

> The galvy outfit here in town will not do anything related to
> automobiles
> whatsoever.  I tried to have the cappings and windshield frame done,

Well, they only know it's car parts if you tell them its car parts. Be
creative...

=====
DaveB
Arlington, VA
"GreenHELL" '72 SIII 88"- "Unstoppable"
"Red Square" '60 SII 109"- "Purrs like a (leaky) kitten" 

Please ignore the following words from our sponsor:
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com

--__--__--

Message: 42
From: "N Forbes" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 06:11:28 +0000
Subject: [lro] neat products
Reply-To: [email-masked]

I was looking through an old copy of a 4x4 mag the other day and came across 
an article about neat products. One really caught my eye. Bleed screws with 
a built in check valve. To bleed the brakes, you just unscrew the bleed 
screw and pump the peddle, making sure to keep the resevoir topped up. As 
you depress the peddle, the little ball bearing is pushed out of the way and 
the fluid shoots out. As the paddle comes back up, the spring pushes the 
ball bearing against the seal and keeps any air from entering the system. 
Has anyone seen these made to fit a Rover? Seems like a dandy little idea.

Niall Forbes
66 IIa 88SW - The Red Zit
Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
The Nova Scotian Rover - http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/forbes/intro.htm

"See the happy moron,
He doesn't give a damn.
I wish I were a moron.
My God! Perhaps I am!"
--author unknown

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.

--__--__--

Message: 43
From: "N Forbes" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 06:13:19 +0000
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Rich, they would probably be more than happy to do the windshield frame and 
cappings from your boat.

Niall Forbes
66 IIa 88SW - The Red Zit
Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
The Nova Scotian Rover - http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/forbes/intro.htm

"See the happy moron,
He doesn't give a damn.
I wish I were a moron.
My God! Perhaps I am!"
--author unknown

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

--__--__--

Message: 44
From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 22:59:22 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Well, they only know it's car parts if you tell them its car parts. Be
> creative....

I guess you're right about that but what else could a 109 frame be?

--__--__--

Message: 45
From: "Rich Williams" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [lro] NE Galvanizing
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2002 23:01:02 -0800
Reply-To: [email-masked]

> Rich, they would probably be more than happy to do the windshield frame
and
> cappings from your boat.

My boat - yeah - my boat!  Dammit, why didn't I think of that?

Hmmmm....

Now, where'd that phone number go.......

--__--__--

_______________________________________________
* Team.Net hosted courtesy of Amaranth Networks, Inc. http://Amaranth.com/ *
* Powered by SUN(r). The network is the computer.(tm) *
LRO mailing list
[email-masked]
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro

End of LRO Digest