Jim Rhodes, basking in the reflection of my post, noted:

>Re: Wait!  The ripple is there for a purpose.  The glass was installed to
>protect the stained glass from the ravages of weather.  and...
>I would leave the ripple glass and concentrate on making it more airtight.

<snip>

>I agree,  Wait!  <snipperoo>  What I do know is that to trap
>air between an outer and an inner plane can be deadly to the art glass
>system, without due consideration to temperature build-up, expansion and
>movement (expecially the daily and seasonal cyclical movements, most
>especially in temperature responsive lead), convection currents,
>condensation, weeping, vent-in, vent-out, etc. etc.   Think it through.
>Exposing the stained glass can be a mistake, but the worst thing you can
>do, in my opinion, is to seal a piece of heat building,
>bound-to-fog-eventually sheet plastic on the outside.

And this, from the ever observant Twybil:

>Please not too airtight - the heat build-up will result in distortion of the
>lead cames of the stained glass. Be careful.

Yeah, I regretted that not-thought-through statement right after sending
it, but had no chance to correct myself 'till now as I was dashing to and
fro.  What I _really_ meant to say was "concentrate on resolving the
condensation problem."

Vandalism is a good enough reason for me to try to retain the ripple glass.

Carefully chosing my signature lines, I remain

_________________________________________________

Dan Becker, Exec. Dir.,                   "What's this?  Fan mail
Raleigh Historic Districts Comm.      from some flounder?"
[log in to unmask]                           --Bullwinkle J. Moose