[NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business

Fri Jan 16 10:59:11 AKST 2009

Why should UGLY be a factor in a pipe as it is confined within the beauty of the aircraft?  These people have not the knowledge of a well designed and tested component.

Wayne Galligan

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: John Pavlick 
  To: General pattern discussion 
  Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 11:16 AM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] BOLLY out of business

        Gray,
         I will tell you this:
        I use your pipes primarily due to the weight and performance advantages. However, I know of a few instances where I've recommended them to others, only to have the guy tell me that it was so ugly (the pipe) when he got it that he decided to sell it and use something else. I guess it's a matter of personal preference but that's something to keep in mind.

        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, 4:57 PM

          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 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  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/20090116/9c3ae2df/attachment.html>