Mitch,

I've been thinking about that one myself. However, in his article, Jim does mention that either one works - matter of preference. My only concern with the dowel approach is that the holes in F2 may need to be elongated as the space behind the wing, even with the angled TE, might not allow dropping the TE onto the fuse with circular holes. The dowels might actually need a little more vertical room. Not really a problem though as long as they don't have any side play since the fuse cradle will prevent any vertical movement. I had to do this on another recent build.

I went with the dowel approach on the D10 - two dowels and one screw in the rear. I guess if the screw fails, I'm toast... I could use two...mmm. Maybe two 6-32 nylon bolts. Actually the screws are part of the reason I don't like torque rod aileron setups - it gets in the way. I find that sort of building and checking tedious since its unnecessary. With large ailerons and plenty of space between the torque rods and the TE it's not so bad - not the case with pattern ships.

BTW, the classic scheme model in the first post on my thread was retrofitted for a 4-stroke and carbon gear under the tank area for SPA. Looks like what you might have in mind. Here's the picture.

Happy Xmas building! David.