[NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business
Steven Maxwell
patternrules at yahoo.com
Fri Jan 16 08:10:57 AKST 2009
Make them gears straight I always cut the pads at gear plate smaller to save a little extra weight. If you want slanted just mount the gear plate at an angle to get the effect of a slanted gear maybe a different load on everything but should work.
Steve Maxwell
--- On Fri, 1/16/09, Gray E Fowler <gfowler at raytheon.com> wrote:
> From: Gray E Fowler <gfowler at raytheon.com>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Date: Friday, January 16, 2009, 11:57 AM
> If "swept" gear are preferred for the appearance,
> and impact form fit and
> function, that is, there is a performace trade off to look
> cool, then all
> who prioitize in such a manner will be unhappy with a gear
> set if we make
> it. My priorties going forward will be:
>
> 1. Performance =stiffness, weight, twist- balanced by
> 2. Cost= material used, labor and cycle time
> 3. Cosmetics= need to look good BUT it is #3
>
> If Cost were no issue We could make a gorgeous set of
> ultimate performing
> gear, but cost is a large issue and if AeroSlave does not
> follow through
> it will be because of cost. We must be able to cover our
> non reccurring
> costs of engineering and especially molds which are very
> expensive. I am
> always a bit hesitant with the pattern crowd and the need
> for the plane's
> components to be prettier than the pilot or even his wife!
> I understand
> paint finish and such but making a landing gear perfectly
> gorgeous when
> scutinized up close may add $25 per set. Some will say this
> is a
> requirement, some will not. This is what I am trying to
> figure out at the
> moment. Lance and I have a big handle on the technical
> aspects, but things
> like sweep, finish etc can kill this (from a business
> apsect) before we
> get off the ground. Swept gear will require more molds
> =$$$. Almost
> everyone cuts a single gear into a left and a right.
>
> I do find all this input interesting, but Lance and I will
> have to figure
> out how to proceed. This feedback about stiffness,
> bouncing, toe in etc is
> great. We have prototypes performing very well, but now we
> need to
> productionize the design.
>
>
>
>
> Gray Fowler
> Senior Principal Chemical Engineer
> Radomes and Specialty Apertures
> Technical Staff Composites Engineering
> Raytheon
>
>
>
> "Keith Black" <tkeithblack at gmail.com>
> Sent by: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> 01/15/2009 09:45 PM
> Please respond to
> General pattern discussion
> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>
>
> To
> "'General pattern discussion'"
> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Gray, the toe in twist issue on the ES gear was definitely
> an issue I ran
> into, at least with the taller electric version. Also, on
> crosswind
> landings if I didn’t straighten it out just right before
> touching down it
> would start doing a sideways hoping action with the forward
> leg acting
> like a spring. I think you may have seen this in Lubbock.
> This is the only
> set of gear I’ve ever experienced this with. More ridged
> gear don’t seem
> prone to this behavior.
>
> As to straight vs. swept, straight may be easier to
> fabricate as a first
> attempt to get something to market and would provide
> interchangeability.
> On the other hand, if you dork one half of your gear you
> still have to buy
> a whole new set and there’s not much you can do with the
> other half,
> unless you have a habit of dorking gear. The swept look is
> most
> definitely nicer. I’d go with what you think will sell
> the best, based on
> sex appeal, and will be structurally sound. I wouldn’t
> worry about giving
> the multiple gear dorkers the ability to use either half on
> either side.
> Besides, multiple gear dorkers will help keep you in
> business. J
>
> Keith
>
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf
> Of Gray E
> Fowler
> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 4:57 PM
> To: General pattern discussion
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business
>
>
> Anthony
>
> What did you think about the ES gear twist? That is the
> wheel going toe
> in- toe out hitting small bumps. ES had nothing but zero
> degree fibers.
> That is the one design issue I am conteplating at the
> moment.
>
> Also considering that all new planes are widebody that is
> what needs to be
> addressed..BUT having a 1 continuous gear will be more
> weight. I am
> thinking it is better to split the gear for a weight
> savings. If we make
> two pieces, and either piece can be a left or a right, then
> a broken gear
> is only on one side. Any advantage to that?
>
>
>
>
> Gray Fowler
> Senior Principal Chemical Engineer
> Radomes and Specialty Apertures
> Technical Staff Composites Engineering
> Raytheon
>
>
> Anthony Romano <anthonyr105 at hotmail.com>
> Sent by: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> 01/15/2009 04:18 PM
>
>
> Please respond to
> General pattern discussion
> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>
>
>
> To
> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Graph Tech is not for us. I am sure their stuff is well
> suited for the
> IMAC style planes that they are designed for but too heavy
> and way too
> stiff for our use.
> I went through their website and picked a gear based on
> dimension of the
> ES. 2+ ounces heavier and twice as thick with zero flex.
> Broke the gear
> out of my Black Magic many times when hitting small holes
> in the runway.
> Rick donated his ES gear and life has been much better.
>
> Anthony
>
>
>
> From: jlachow at hotmail.com
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:59:26 -0500
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business
>
> Anyone have any luck with the Graph Tech RC stuff? Only
> experience was
> with some smaller electrics that worked just fine. They
> have carbon pants
> and spinners, as well.
>
>
> From: tony at radiosouthrc.com
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:00:23 -0500
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business
>
>
> Thanks, Jim. Those are $112.00 I think… about double
> that of the Bolly….
> Not sure how that will go….. but if there are no other
> choices…
>
>
> Tony Stillman, President
> Radio South, Inc.
> 139 Altama Connector, Box 322
> Brunswick, GA 31525
> 1-800-962-7802
> www.radiosouthrc.com
>
>
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf
> Of Woodward,
> Jim (US SSA)
> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 2:52 PM
> To: General pattern discussion
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business
>
> Tony,
>
> Luiz at Net Box Hobby carrys the CA carbon gear.
>
> Thanks,
> Jim
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf
> Of Tony
> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 2:36 PM
> To: 'General pattern discussion'
> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business
>
> I just received conformation that BOLLY has gone out of
> business.
> Unfortunately, this is a major supplier of CF landing gear
> and wheel
> pants. I have been awaiting a shipment of several items,
> and now it does
> not look like that will happen. I am working now to
> determine if there
> are any gear/wheel pants available.
>
> The really bad thing is that I am not sure what options we
> have left,
> other than going with a kit/arf manufacturer’s gear. Ed
> Skorpa dropped
> his gear last year…
>
>
>
> Tony Stillman, President
> Radio South, Inc.
> 139 Altama Connector, Box 322
> Brunswick, GA 31525
> 1-800-962-7802
> www.radiosouthrc.com
>
>
>
> Windows Live™ Hotmail®: Chat. Store. Share. Do more with
> mail. See how it
> works.
>
> Windows Live™ Hotmail®: Chat. Store. Share. Do more with
> mail. See how it
> works._______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list