[NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business

Fri Jan 16 10:20:29 AKST 2009

OUCH! I hate it when I'm wrong.  You are, of course, correct, John<G>!  

For paved surfaces, I find that having some toe in is very helpful in stabilizing the takeoff roll....It is also hard to get with most current gear installations....I cant the gear forward on the mounting plate to provide a little toe in, but this is making putting the wheels farther forward of the CG.  

For mounting I've used everything from 2 4X40 botls on each side to Three 8X32's on each side.  I don't think I've ever broken a bolt....I have had a couple of gear plates fail, though.  I had a buddy who tried 1/4 X 20  nylon bolts....BAD IDEA<G>.

G

---- John Pavlick <jpavlick at idseng.com> wrote: 

=============
Maybe, but how many times have you seen this:
There's a strong crosswind (of course there is - you're at a Pattern contest!). If the caller simply puts the plane on the runway and you slowly advance the throttle, the first thing you have to do is apply a good deal of rudder in an attempt to counteract the crosswind. Unless you're very good, the plane wags it's tail.  One way to deal with this is to have  your caller pinch the fin while you open the throttle. This lets the prop blast help you make the rudder correction ASAP. Why does this happen? 

Tricycle gear is NOT "all" forward of the G.G. Just the nose wheel is. The mains should be just slightly behind the C.G., otherwise you'd need a tailwheel. VBG Think about it. What makes the plane rest on all 3 wheels? If the C.G. was behind the mains, it would rest on the tail like uh, a tail dragger. :)

John Pavlick

--- On Fri, 1/16/09, glmiller3 at suddenlink.net <glmiller3 at suddenlink.net> wrote:

From: glmiller3 at suddenlink.net <glmiller3 at suddenlink.net>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Friday, January 16, 2009, 5:38 PM

Gray,

I think that this may be a theoretical issue without practical importance. 
Modern pattern designs have such a long tail moment, that unless they are really
nose heavy, there is enough weight on the tail wheel to keep them tracking until
the vertical fin can take over to prevent "ground loops".  In fact,
the closer the main gear is to the CG, the LESS weight there is on the tail
wheel and the greater the tendency to ground loop.....I would think.  I'm
not an engineer, but it seems to me that the tricycle gear design is ALL forward
of the CG and they aren't noted for instability...just the opposite.  

I have some pattern ships that won't turn around in a cross wind, but none
that has a problem tracking for takeoff.

G
---- Gray E Fowler <gfowler at raytheon.com> wrote: 

=============
John 

Yours is the first post with a technical reasoning for sweep, and it makes 
sense. I of course have a AeroSlave Symphony with an ES gear and have not 
experienced ground issues. I am sure other designs do have issues as you 
describe. How common is this problem?

Gray Fowler
Senior Principal Chemical Engineer
Radomes and Specialty Apertures
Technical Staff Composites Engineering
Raytheon

John Pavlick <jpavlick at idseng.com> 
Sent by: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
01/16/2009 11:13 AM
Please respond to
jpavlick at idseng.com; 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,
 My understanding of why we try to move the wheels as close to the C.G as 
possible is to increase yaw stability on the ground (decrease the tendency 
to ground loop). Tail draggers are inherently unstable because the landing 
gear is located in front of the C.G. Since we don't have brakes on modern 
Pattern planes, the wheels can be pretty far back without causing much of 
a problem. Especially on smooth surfaces. The closer you place the wheels 
to the nose of the airplane (further ahead of the C.G.), the more tendency 
there is to ground loop. Also, it sometimes makes it hard to get the plane 
to rotate if the wheels are too far forward. 
If Pattern planes were designed with the gear location further back, we 
wouldn't need swept gear.

John Pavlick

--- 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, 4:37 PM

Why do you prefer sweep?

Gray Fowler
Senior Principal Chemical Engineer
Radomes and Specialty Apertures
Technical Staff Composites Engineering
Raytheon 

Richard Strickland <pamrich47 at hotmail.com> 
Sent by: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org 
01/15/2009 05:17 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

If I were to complain about anything on Matt's gear (I'm not) I would 
prefer a little sweep which would preclude 'a one side fits both" 
arrangement.  How are most of you guys mounting them--two or three bolts? 
I've been using three 4-40s but just bought one and the former owner had 
two per side.

RS

To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
From: gfowler at raytheon.com
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:56:48 -0600
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 

Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync. Check it out.
_______________________________________________
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

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion