[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: REFLECTOR: Engine weights
Can't help from seeing all this stuff on the IO540. Moving the gear
would only satisfy the problem of the airplane falling on the tail.
What about the CG? Moving the gear does nothing about the CG. In fact,
keeping the airplane from falling on its tail by less weight in the
engine compartment or extra weight in the nose is the ONLY way to solve
the CG problem, not moving the gear. Extra weight in the nose can also
be a problem due to the difficulty of stopping the momentum created by
the extra weight once the airplane is pitched up due to either a pilot
induced pitch change or as a result of a gust at low speed. In any
case, the use of a heavier engine should be explored with caution and
testing by someone qualified to do this testing. Most of us are not
qualified to do this.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Aegerter [SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 1998 10:23 AM
> To: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: Engine weights
> Dave Black wrote
> >Simon Aegerter wrote:
> >> Carl Hoffmann wrote:
> >> >> IO-360 320.4 lbs 24.2 inches from firewall.
> >> >> I0-540 396.4 lbs 28.2 inches from firewall.
> >> With all that weight all the way back there, how do you 540 people
> >> your bird from falling on its tail? Park it like a Long?
> >What about modifying the main gear so it extends farther aft?
> First, we have learned in the meantime that tese numbers are simply
> fill-ins, but probably not too far from reality, soooo:
> Moving the gear aft, that's what Allan Shaw recommends. Works for FGs;
> wouldn't know how to do it on a retract. Maybe like Greg Poole
> but even then you don't have more than a couple of inches at most or
> wheel hits the spar on retraction. Making the whole bird longer is
> the best bet.
> Simon Aegerter, Winterthur, Switzerland