---------------------------------------------------------- Commander-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sat 12/07/02: 18 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 05:50 AM - Re: Questions regarding the 680FL (Jim Crunkleton) 2. 09:16 AM - Aviation trivia (Nico van Niekerk) 3. 11:10 AM - Re: Pick a Number, Any Number (Kerry Johnson) 4. 11:23 AM - Re: Pick a Number, Any Number (Bow) 5. 12:23 PM - Model 520 (Barry Collman) 6. 12:23 PM - Model 520 (Barry Collman) 7. 12:56 PM - Re: Model 520 (Jim Crunkleton) 8. 12:56 PM - Re: Model 520 (Barry Collman) 9. 01:11 PM - Re: Model 520 (Barry Collman) 10. 01:23 PM - Re: Model 520 (CloudCraft@aol.com) 11. 01:29 PM - Re: Model 520 (CloudCraft@aol.com) 12. 02:27 PM - December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney (Glenn Sneed) 13. 03:02 PM - Re: December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney (Bow) 14. 04:26 PM - Re: December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney (Nico van Niekerk) 15. 05:25 PM - Re: 520 CG (Bruce Campbell) 16. 06:48 PM - Re: Model 520 (YOURTCFG@aol.com) 17. 06:52 PM - Re: December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney (YOURTCFG@aol.com) 18. 09:35 PM - Re: December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney (Bow) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 05:50:26 AM PST US From: Jim Crunkleton Subject: Re: Commander-List: Questions regarding the 680FL --> Commander-List message posted by: Jim Crunkleton Randy Dettmer, AIA wrote: >--> Commander-List message posted by: "Randy Dettmer, AIA" > >I find that if I stick the cans in just under the cowling on top of the >engines (secured with duct tape of course, so they don't rattle around >during take-off and cruise...), > >>> >>>It sure is good to see you Californy guys discover the many uses of duct tape. Hell, it's even more important than getting a new set of wheels for your house! >>> Like I always say, "If you can't fix it with duct tape, it probably ain't worth fixin!" Crunk >> > > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 09:16:06 AM PST US From: "Nico van Niekerk" Subject: Commander-List: Aviation trivia --> Commander-List message posted by: "Nico van Niekerk" Folks, I picked up these trivia snippets from a local rag in Conejo Valley, written by Janet Spencer. I will post them as I go along. Quite interesting. Especially this one about Bob Hoover. It couldn't have been in a Commander, I am sure: Bob Hoover was in his stunt plane when the engine went dead, leaving him without enough altitude to get back to the runway. As he approached the airport it looked like he was going to crash into the chain-link fence surrounding the runway. Just at that moment a truck happened to be passing by on the road. Hoover managed to bounce his wheels off the top of the truck, giving him sufficient altitude to clear the fence and land safely. Nico ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 11:10:59 AM PST US From: "Kerry Johnson" Subject: RE: Commander-List: Pick a Number, Any Number --> Commander-List message posted by: "Kerry Johnson" I dunno, bilo, I already have that number on my Aerostar, N69MF. KJ -----Original Message----- From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bow Subject: Re: Commander-List: Pick a Number, Any Number --> Commander-List message posted by: "Bow" Well somebody has got to do it. It might as well be me. IS THE NUMBER 69 AVAILABLE? bilbo ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Schuermann" Subject: Re: Commander-List: Pick a Number, Any Number > --> Commander-List message posted by: Chris Schuermann > > > CloudCraft@aol.com wrote: > > But do let us remeber that James Bond's superiors all have letters and not > > numbers ... > > Well then...that pretty much makes me "Q" then doesn't it? (which > certainly in no way implies any superiority to much more than a head of > lettuce) > Hmm, maybe not. Could be confused with "The Q" of Star Trek fame.... > Of course all my engineer geek friends would first think of the slope of > a bandpass filter...no, that's not good. When talking, someone might > think I was refering to "queue", and I've never been that great with > numerical theory so that won't work. I don't put blue chalk on my head > and hit balls with it so that's not a fit... never mind...... > > Just Chris > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 11:23:06 AM PST US From: "Bow" Subject: Re: Commander-List: Pick a Number, Any Number --> Commander-List message posted by: "Bow" > > I dunno, bilo, I already have that number on my Aerostar, N69MF. > > KJ That certainly has some inferences. bilbo ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 12:23:14 PM PST US From: "Barry Collman" Subject: Commander-List: Model 520 --> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" Hi Keith, I'm confused over an entry inthe Type Certificate Data Sheet, primarily as a result of helping the FlightSim guys with their model of the 520 Commander. The TCDS says that the Datum is "Located 152 inches forward of wing leading edge". Now, that seems to put it about 2ft in front of the nose. To me, it looks like "152" is an error for "102". Also, the C.G. range, to my untrained eye, is both pretty narrow (+168.6 to +175.1) and quite a bit further back than looks right. The FlightSim guys are using a quarter wing cord as their C.G., and many other items are referenced in feet from this point, but the manufacturer's figure is also built into the equation. Have you any comments which will put my mind at rest? I don't want to give them bad data, then when we get the FlightSim 520 to use, it won't fly!!!! Much of this applies to a host of Models, so we need to clarify it for 'The Book' anyway. Thanks! Very Best Regards, Barry ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 12:23:14 PM PST US From: "Barry Collman" Subject: Commander-List: Model 520 --> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" Hi Capt Jimbob, I'm just working on the November FAA changes, and will be forwarding the usual file to later on tonight, or tomorrow. In the meantime though, I'm confused over an entry in the Type Certificate Data Sheet, primarily as a result of helping the FlightSim guys with their model of the 520 Commander. The TCDS says that the Datum is "Located 152 inches forward of wing leading edge". Now, that seems to put it about 2ft in front of the nose. To me, it looks like "152" is an error for "102". Also, the C.G. range, to my untrained eye, is both pretty narrow (+168.6 to +175.1) and quite a bit further back than looks right. The FlightSim guys are using a quarter wing cord as their C.G., and many other items are referenced in feet from this point, but the manufacturer's figure is also built into the equation. Have you any comments which will put my mind at rest? I don't want to give them bad data, then when we get the FlightSim 520 to use, it won't fly!!!! Thanks! Very Best Regards, Barry ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 12:56:05 PM PST US From: "Jim Crunkleton" Subject: Re: Commander-List: Model 520 --> Commander-List message posted by: "Jim Crunkleton" Barry, I don't have the TC handy but the manual shows the first bulkhead frame of the plane @ -22.5" and the wing leading edge at about 105". The nose dome screws to the first bulkhead and extends forward approx 4". After looking thru the manual some more I found the listed specs for flap area. They say it's 37.2 sq.ft. (Aileron area is 20.52 sq.ft.) They also list MAC as 72.12". They also list the C.G.range in % of MAC as forward limit 23% and aft limit 32%. They also list the location of MAC from the centerline at 110.2" The dihedral of the main wing is 4 degrees and the dihedral of the tail is 10 degrees. ( the forward sweep from the root is 14 degrees.) They also say that the '0" station is approximately 27" aft of the nose. (The approximation comes from a hand hammered nose bowl.) (Most airliners put the datum point out in front of the airplane so weight and balance computations only use positive numbers.) For what it's worth. :-) Crunk ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 12:56:47 PM PST US From: "Barry Collman" Subject: Re: Commander-List: Model 520 --> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" Well, as you can guess, my last two messages should have been sent to Jim Metzger and Keith Gordon. But, hey, if anyone else has some input - then great! Barry C. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barry Collman" Subject: Commander-List: Model 520 | --> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" | | Hi Keith, | | I'm confused over an entry inthe Type Certificate Data Sheet, primarily as a | result of helping the FlightSim guys with their model of the 520 Commander. | | The TCDS says that the Datum is "Located 152 inches forward of wing leading | edge". | | Now, that seems to put it about 2ft in front of the nose. To me, it looks like | "152" is an error for "102". | | Also, the C.G. range, to my untrained eye, is both pretty narrow (+168.6 to | +175.1) and quite a bit further back than looks right. | | The FlightSim guys are using a quarter wing cord as their C.G., and many other | items are referenced in feet from this point, but the manufacturer's figure is | also built into the equation. | | Have you any comments which will put my mind at rest? I don't want to give them | bad data, then when we get the FlightSim 520 to use, it won't fly!!!! Much of | this applies to a host of Models, so we need to clarify it for 'The Book' | anyway. | | Thanks! | | Very Best Regards, | | Barry | | | | | | | ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 01:11:39 PM PST US From: "Barry Collman" Subject: Re: Commander-List: Model 520 --> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" Thanks Crunk! I've got drawings, which show the leading edge of the wing is 102" aft of datum. The first bulkhead is indeed at -22.5 The flap area is interesting, because Chris Haag & I reckon the figure of 37.2 sq.ft includes the non-moveable area of the rear nacelle itself. I'll have do get my ruler to the drawing and do some rough calculations. We need to know for sure! So, once again, my sincere thanks are due to you Jim. Is it raining where you are? Yes? Then that'll explain the swift responses. No? Then why aren't you out flying??!!!!! Sincere Best Regards, Barry ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Crunkleton" Subject: Re: Commander-List: Model 520 | --> Commander-List message posted by: "Jim Crunkleton" | | Barry, | I don't have the TC handy but the manual shows the first bulkhead frame of | the plane @ -22.5" and the wing leading edge at about 105". The nose dome | screws to the first bulkhead and extends forward approx 4". | After looking thru the manual some more I found the listed specs for flap | area. | They say it's 37.2 sq.ft. (Aileron area is 20.52 sq.ft.) | They also list MAC as 72.12". They also list the C.G.range in % of MAC as | forward limit 23% and aft limit 32%. They also list the location of MAC from | the centerline at 110.2" | The dihedral of the main wing is 4 degrees and the dihedral of the tail is | 10 degrees. ( the forward sweep from the root is 14 degrees.) | They also say that the '0" station is approximately 27" aft of the nose. | (The approximation comes from a hand hammered nose bowl.) | (Most airliners put the datum point out in front of the airplane so weight | and balance computations only use positive numbers.) | For what it's worth. :-) | Crunk | | | | | | | ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 01:23:24 PM PST US From: CloudCraft@aol.com Subject: Re: Commander-List: Model 520 --> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com In a message dated 12/07/02 12:23:39 Pacific Standard Time, barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk writes: > Have you any comments which will put my mind at rest? I don't want to give > them > bad data, then when we get the FlightSim 520 to use, it won't fly!!!! Much > of > this applies to a host of Models, so we need to clarify it for 'The Book' > anyway. Sir Barry, Put your mind to rest? HA! I have only added doubt and torment for you. In flying the various models and making up weight and balance worksheets, I came across two different datums. Unfortunately, I can't recall when exactly (in production) the datum was changed, but I remember calling it into question as well. Whilst at Down Town Airpark in 1994, Pete Peterson (in his 70s then, and a real treasure chest of information on Commanders) explained it to me. The datum was either referenced to the nose, or, another point on the fuselage (the leading edge of the wing?) but either way, ended up at a point in space forward of the nose so all moments were positive, when working weight and balance computations. The CG range you mention on the 520 doesn't sound out of reason; but remember that CG range was increased via Service Letter later on and I *think* that had to do with the bobweight installation, much later than the TDC was published for that model. Wish I had big, authoritative answers for you, but I only have feeble recollections. I mean, after all, you are asking questions that involve math and I HATE math. Wing Commander Gordon. ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 01:29:06 PM PST US From: CloudCraft@aol.com Subject: Re: Commander-List: Model 520 --> Commander-List message posted by: CloudCraft@aol.com In a message dated 12/07/02 12:56:30 Pacific Standard Time, crunk12@bellsouth.net writes: > I don't have the TC handy but the manual shows the first bulkhead frame of > the plane @ -22.5" and the wing leading edge at about 105". Thanks, Crunk. That reminds me: I also discoverd that Weight and Balance datums DO NOT relate to frame stations, as one might think is logical. That's what I tripped over, and led me to research just what the heck the datum WAS based on ... I was trying to relate the datum to a frame station on the 680-FL and it just didn't match anything structural that was a clear "Ah ha!" Thanks for posting those numbers. Wing Commander Gordon ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 02:27:35 PM PST US From: "Glenn Sneed" Subject: Commander-List: December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney --> Commander-List message posted by: "Glenn Sneed" Many of this generation ignored or think it is silly when you say "Dec.7th, less we forget". Well, lets us all remember those who gave life and limb for the freedom we have today. Bongo52 ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 03:02:51 PM PST US From: "Bow" Subject: Re: Commander-List: December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney --> Commander-List message posted by: "Bow" That memorial at Pearl Harbor sends chills through me every time I go. It's even better now with the "Mighty Mo" standing guard over the Arizona. bilbo ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glenn Sneed" Subject: Commander-List: December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney > --> Commander-List message posted by: "Glenn Sneed" > > Many of this generation ignored or think it is silly when you say "Dec.7th, > less we forget". > > Well, lets us all remember those who gave life and limb for the freedom we > have today. > > Bongo52 > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 04:26:41 PM PST US From: "Nico van Niekerk" Subject: Re: Commander-List: December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney --> Commander-List message posted by: "Nico van Niekerk" The only (small) way we can repay those who lay their lives on the line for those who remain in warm beds and have warm meals at home, is to go and vote. The majority is getting smaller and smaller every year. And more activist. The country's already got a hangover. Nico ----- Original Message ----- From: "Glenn Sneed" Subject: Commander-List: December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney > --> Commander-List message posted by: "Glenn Sneed" > > Many of this generation ignored or think it is silly when you say "Dec.7th, > less we forget". > > Well, lets us all remember those who gave life and limb for the freedom we > have today. > > Bongo52 > > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 05:25:07 PM PST US From: "Bruce Campbell" Subject: Commander-List: re: 520 CG --> Commander-List message posted by: "Bruce Campbell" My wt and balance was done a little over a year ago. It reports the distance from the datum to the mains as 189 in, cg 174, gross wt 4114, I assume the datum is the tip of the nose. The arm of the nose wheel is 28.6 I really beleive the Commander unloaded is aft of the CG, since when I'm flying alone and aerobrake the nose wheelp quite easily Bruce CAmpbell AC52 N4186B ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 06:48:06 PM PST US From: YOURTCFG@aol.com Subject: Re: Commander-List: Model 520 --> Commander-List message posted by: YOURTCFG@aol.com In a message dated 12/7/02 12:23:54 PM Pacific Standard Time, barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk writes: > Also, the C.G. range, to my untrained eye, is both pretty narrow (+168.6 to > +175.1) and quite a bit further back than looks right. > HI BARRY....That sounds correct. The CG rang for my 680E is 166.1 - 175.12. Considering the added fuselage length, I think the expanded ranges seems correct. Also, My Datum is also 152 inch forward of the LE of the wing. The MFG can establish a "datum" anyplace they chose and by extending it out in front of the nose, if simplifies W & B calculations as all the numbers are positive. Thanks for the updates, I had 3 new members from the last mailing!! jb ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 06:52:06 PM PST US From: YOURTCFG@aol.com Subject: Re: Commander-List: December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney --> Commander-List message posted by: YOURTCFG@aol.com In a message dated 12/7/02 2:28:05 PM Pacific Standard Time, srglenn1@msn.com writes: > Well, lets us all remember those who gave life and limb for the freedom we > have today. > AND DON'T BUY JAPANESE CARS!! Like Mitsubishi (made the zero), Kawasaki (made a dive bomber) I drive a Cadillac jb ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 09:35:44 PM PST US From: "Bow" Subject: Re: Commander-List: December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney --> Commander-List message posted by: "Bow" Be careful JB. It maybe hard to be completely Japanese free. Even with a Catarak. bilbo ----- Original Message ----- From: Subject: Re: Commander-List: December 7 - A Day That Will Live in Infiney > --> Commander-List message posted by: YOURTCFG@aol.com > > In a message dated 12/7/02 2:28:05 PM Pacific Standard Time, srglenn1@msn.com > writes: > > > Well, lets us all remember those who gave life and limb for the freedom we > > have today. > > > > AND DON'T BUY JAPANESE CARS!! Like Mitsubishi (made the zero), Kawasaki > (made a dive bomber) I drive a Cadillac jb > >