[NSRCA-discussion] soft mount rubber ends needed

Wed Oct 3 08:03:12 AKDT 2007

I just got back to working on a ship I traded for several years ago. The
person who started it used a beam mounted soft mount. This unit has a
metal strip that the engine bolts to. This strip is then suspended by
connection to an aluminum spacer mounted on the beam. A rectangle of hard
rubber connects the stand off to the metal mounting strip. My problem is
that the 4 rubber isolators are now the consistancy of licorice. There is
no strength or memory left in them. Does anyone know wher I can get
replacements, or should I just make the required mods and get a hyde
mount?

Terry T.

On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 07:47:21 -0500 "White, Chris" <chris at ssd.fsi.com>
writes:
Understanding that a lot of misinterpretation can happen in reading or
talking about things without actually being directed in person on the
subject article, I dismissed the following story. Now after this post it
has me curious again and I would be interested to hear comments from
people who may have been told the same.  

The story comes as a result of a couple of local pilots who were working
on a well-known $2K arf from 2005-6 era that had no reference lines on
the fuse, nor measurements in the plans referring to Thrustline or any
clue as to where to start on fuselage angle to engine-wing-stab setups. 
Communication with the designer resulted in the customer being told that
it should be done by appearance.  (eg: the way you wish to see your fuse
angle in level flight cruise.)

That seems very subject to interpretation and I would think if a person
were a few degrees off it would make a significant difference on
aerodynamic behavior during maneuvering. (mixing etc)

There’s probably a post on this somewhere, but Bob’s comment led me to
think of that setup dilemma.   I’ve never seen or heard of an airplane
kit/arf without some reference to thrust line, until I heard my local
friends told me about this one.

Is this scenario familiar to anyone out there? 

(Gee, do I push send or not…….ok I’ll send it.)
Chris White

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Bob
Richards
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 7:13 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane angle of attack

I never meant to draw any conclusion about the knife edge performance of
airliners or bombers in my original post. I was merely stating that the
reason we PATTERN FLIERS adjust the incidences of the wing and stab (ON
OUR PATTERN PLANES) has to do with aerobatic performance. As far as I
know, the reason the designers of airliners, bombers, and most full-scale
airplanes pick a incidence value has to do mainly with efficiency in
cruise.

Bob R.

rcmaster199 at aol.com wrote:
I remember watching a clip of a full size multi engine bomber type in
test flight. The test pilot banked hard to knife edge near the ground
(maybe 500 ft) for some unknown reason and swiftly proceeded to put it
in. Don't remember the plane's or test pilot's names. 

Full scale fuselages are designed to minimize drag as much as possible
(for max range) so they tend to be pencil thin comparatively speaking.
Pencil thin fuses do not fly knife flight well nor are they intended to
do so. And the higher the weight the worse the problem. At risk of being
glib, that test pilot found the outside of the envelope.

MattK

-----Original Message-----
From: chris moon <cjm767driver at hotmail.com>
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Sent: Tue, Oct 2 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane angle of attack
The optimum AOA on airliners is a function of wing design. It's the 
operator's job to try and stay near the optimum AOA for maximum 
efficiency. Lighter gross weights require either higher altitudes or 
lower true airspeed to be most efficient. Likewise, heavier weights will 
have you faster and or lower. I guess what I'm saying is that the 
optimum AOA is essentially dictated by wing design and we juggle the 
other variables in order operate the wing as efficiently as possible. 

I have rolled the 737, 757, 767 and A320 in the simulator and they make 
poor pattern planes. I'm sure there is a significant downgrade for a 
single roll that loses 5000+ feet of altitude. Don't even ask about 
knife edge performance. 

Chris 

Bob Richards wrote: 
> That makes sense to me. The AOA depends on the load. In an extreme 
> case, very lightly loaded, I don't think you would want to fly with 
> the fuselage in a nose down attitude, that would probably be 
> inefficient. Better to have it slightly nose up in cruise with a full 
> load. JMHO. 
> Of course, the reason WE would trim wing incidence would have more to 
> do with overall flight characteristics during aerobatics, particularly 
> with pitch coupling in knife edge flight. 
> Bob R. 
> 
> 
> */chris moon /* wrote: 
> 
> Tried to post this before but it did not go through. 
> 
> The optimum cruise angle of attack for jetliners is somewhere between 
> 2.5 and 5 degrees nose up. Usually closer to 2.5 or 3 degrees for an 
> econ cruise. As fuel burns off and the gross weight goes down, the 
> airplane will need a lower angle of attack to maintain flight which 
> will take us away from our optimum angle (lower). So, we will either 
> climb to where the air is "thinner" and require a higher aoa 
> (angle of 
> attack) to get us back to the 2.5 or 3 degrees or, slow down and 
> maintain the lower altitude thus requiring us to increase the aoa 
> back 
> to optimum. The answer to your question is yes, a jetliner flies at a 
> nose high aoa in cruise. Lift from the fuselage would probably be 
> negligible other than "impact" lift - the force of the relative wind 
> against the raised fuselage bottom. 
> 
> Chris 
> 
> 
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 

Climb to the top of the charts!  Play Star Shuffle:  the word scramble
challenge with star power. Play Now! = 
_______________________________________________  NSRCA-discussion mailing
list  NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion  

Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail!
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20071003/1b7e33c8/attachment.html 