Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:21 AM - KIS TR-1 Flap Sectors (Owen Baker)
2. 07:57 AM - Re: KIS TR-1 Flap Sectors (Keith.Miller@esa.int)
3. 08:41 AM - Re: Questions: (Owen Baker)
4. 08:46 AM - Cirrus SR 22 Vortex Generator (Owen Baker)
5. 11:08 AM - Re: N819PR Nose Gear Failure (Galin Hernandez)
6. 12:27 PM - Re: N819PR Nose Gear Failure (Robert Reed)
7. 01:09 PM - Re: N819PR Nose Gear Failure (Galin Hernandez)
8. 01:44 PM - Re: N819PR Nose Gear Failure (Tim Yoder)
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | KIS TR-1 Flap Sectors |
7/30/2014
Hello Tim, I got out to the airport yesterday and took a good look at my
flap sectors and also took several pictures. My comments here:
1) You wrote: =9CLooks like I cut the new notch back as far as I
could."
Yes, but before you cut the new notch for the flap handle locking cross
pin you actually extended the slot itself further to the rear. Any one
contemplating this modification has to take that into consideration.
2) I wrote: =9CYour flap sectors appear to have a different shape
than mine.=9D and =9CMy flap sectors do not have the sharp
cornered forward projections with
the bottom scoop out that yours does.=9D
My misinterpretation of your photo. Those sharp projections are actually
the bracket holding the flap sector to the wing spar box.
3) I wrote: =9CAlso mine do not have the slope on the aft side of
the forward notch like yours does.=9D
My error. My flap sectors also have that same slope and I have concluded
that my flap sectors are identical to your original configuration.
4) You wrote: =9COn the ground I get the recommended 28
deg.=9D
My angular measurements yesterday showed that on the ground I am getting
25 degrees down flap. Also I measured the distance from the trailing
edge of my flaps to the bottom surface of the wing to fuselage fairing
as you did in the flaps down configuration and you are getting one inch
more than that as was shown in your excellent photograph.
This has been a very beneficial exchange for me and I hope for others
that may be considering this modification. I am much more motivated now
to make this modification =93 we=99ll have to wait to see if
that additional motivation is enough to overcome my inertia.
Many thanks for your help on this Tim.
OC
=================
From: Tim Yoder
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 8:24 PM
Cc: 'TRICKEL MARK'
Subject: RE: Emailing: 033 (2)
Hi OC,
My answers are below your comments/questions below;
=============
From: Owen Baker [mailto:bakerocb@cox.net]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 11:00 AM
Cc: TRICKEL MARK
Subject: Fw: Emailing: 033 (2)
7/28/2014
Hello Tim, Thanks for the pictures and the explanation. You wrote:
1) "Looks like I cut the new notch back as far as I could."
I have contemplated this kind of modification of my flap control sectors
for
some time, but have been too lazy to pursue it. Some comments /
questions:
a) Your flap sectors appear to have a different shape than mine. It
would
appear that Tri-R made some modifications to those sectors in later
kits. My
kit is number 116.
***These are from kit #49, I don't know what yours look like.
b) My flap sectors do not have the sharp cornered forward projections
with
the bottom scoop out that yours does. Any ideas what the purpose of that
is?
*** No
c) Also mine do not have the slope on the aft side of the forward notch
like
yours does. Was that a local modification?
*** No, that is the way It came. I only added the last (left) notch.
I think the easy slope on the aft side of the forward notch just makes
it
easier to move the handle to the first notch.?
d) I see that there is a split plastic tube guard over the bottom edge
of
the slot. What is the purpose of that?
*** good observation, I forgot I did that. I was noticing that in
flight the roll pin wasn't moving smoothly, galling, due to pushing the
release button hard because of the flight load on the flaps. When the
plastic tubes wore out and it started again so I took a closer look and
saw
that the roll pin slot was oriented down, you cannot see it in the photo
but
it is, so I turned the roll pin horizontally and fix that problem.
2) ".... helps the pitch angle on approach."
By that do you mean that you can have a lower nose attitude angle for
the
same indicated airspeed by use of that additional extension of the
flaps? If
so that might just be the additional motivation that I need to make that
added notch modification.
*** Yes, The pitch angle noticeably increases when I go to the last
notch. On the ground I get the recommended 28 deg. After lifting the
trailing edge of the flaps in order to remove the slop in the system.
Right now I insist on keeping the far end of the runway in sight over
the
nose during the approach and flare which gives me a pretty flat nose
attitude at touch down. Now with any speed less than 75 KIAS I would
block
out that over the nose picture. I usually have my engine set at 1,300
RPM +
or - a bit during the approach once I am on glide slope and leave it set
at
that RPM to control descent rate until touch down.
*** My procedure is much like yours with similar numbers, I almost
always have someone with me and my field elevation is 1400' also, I sit
very
tall in the cockpit. And I doubt that I an as good a pilot as you so it
is
hard to compare.
If I could still have that same over the nose picture at 70 KIAS I would
consider making that additional flap sector notch to be a worth while
modification.
*** I only did the mod because I wanted to get the book recommended
28 deg's. and I was glad I did it. I think it was Scott Stearns that
recommended trying to get mire than 28 deg. I would if I had the extra
room.
I hope this helps, Tim
OC
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: KIS TR-1 Flap Sectors |
OC ,
I know that Ray Clegg ( UK ) made the same modification to the flap sector
in his KIS 2 place many years ago and he said it made some improvements for
his short field. He never submitted the modification to our LAA authority,
probably because they would require countless stress calculations . Ray sold
the KIS2 when he bought the KIS Cruiser, and it no longer flies , so we
cant ask for any feedback from the last owner .
Keith
From: "Owen Baker " <bakerocb@cox.net>
To: "KIS-LIST MATRONICS" <kis-list@matronics.com>, "YODER TIM"
<ftyoder@yoderbuilt.com>,
Date: 07/30/2014 02:23 PM
Subject: KIS-List: KIS TR-1 Flap Sectors
Sent by: owner-kis-list-server@matronics.com
7/30/2014
Hello Tim, I got out to the airport yesterday and took a good look at my flap
sectors and also took several pictures. My comments here:
1) You wrote: Looks like I cut the new notch back as far as I could."
Yes, but before you cut the new notch for the flap handle locking cross pin
you actually extended the slot itself further to the rear. Any one
contemplating this modification has to take that into consideration.
2) I wrote: Your flap sectors appear to have a different shape than mine.
and My flap sectors do not have the sharp cornered forward projections with
the bottom scoop out that yours does.
My misinterpretation of your photo. Those sharp projections are actually the
bracket holding the flap sector to the wing spar box.
3) I wrote: Also mine do not have the slope on the aft side of the forward
notch like yours does.
My error. My flap sectors also have that same slope and I have concluded that
my flap sectors are identical to your original configuration.
4) You wrote: On the ground I get the recommended 28 deg.
My angular measurements yesterday showed that on the ground I am getting 25
degrees down flap. Also I measured the distance from the trailing edge of my
flaps to the bottom surface of the wing to fuselage fairing as you did in the
flaps down configuration and you are getting one inch more than that as was
shown in your excellent photograph.
This has been a very beneficial exchange for me and I hope for others that
may be considering this modification. I am much more motivated now to make
this modification well have to wait to see if that additional motivation
is enough to overcome my inertia.
Many thanks for your help on this Tim.
OC
==========================================
From: Tim Yoder
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 8:24 PM
Cc: 'TRICKEL MARK'
Subject: RE: Emailing: 033 (2)
Hi OC,
My answers are below your comments/questions below;
======================================
From: Owen Baker [mailto:bakerocb@cox.net]
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 11:00 AM
Cc: TRICKEL MARK
Subject: Fw: Emailing: 033 (2)
7/28/2014
Hello Tim, Thanks for the pictures and the explanation. You wrote:
1) "Looks like I cut the new notch back as far as I could."
I have contemplated this kind of modification of my flap control sectors for
some time, but have been too lazy to pursue it. Some comments / questions:
a) Your flap sectors appear to have a different shape than mine. It would
appear that Tri-R made some modifications to those sectors in later kits. My
kit is number 116.
***These are from kit #49, I don't know what yours look like.
b) My flap sectors do not have the sharp cornered forward projections with
the bottom scoop out that yours does. Any ideas what the purpose of that is?
*** No
c) Also mine do not have the slope on the aft side of the forward notch like
yours does. Was that a local modification?
*** No, that is the way It came. I only added the last (left) notch.
I think the easy slope on the aft side of the forward notch just makes it
easier to move the handle to the first notch.?
d) I see that there is a split plastic tube guard over the bottom edge of
the slot. What is the purpose of that?
*** good observation, I forgot I did that. I was noticing that in
flight the roll pin wasn't moving smoothly, galling, due to pushing the
release button hard because of the flight load on the flaps. When the
plastic tubes wore out and it started again so I took a closer look and saw
that the roll pin slot was oriented down, you cannot see it in the photo but
it is, so I turned the roll pin horizontally and fix that problem.
2) ".... helps the pitch angle on approach."
By that do you mean that you can have a lower nose attitude angle for the
same indicated airspeed by use of that additional extension of the flaps? If
so that might just be the additional motivation that I need to make that
added notch modification.
*** Yes, The pitch angle noticeably increases when I go to the last
notch. On the ground I get the recommended 28 deg. After lifting the
trailing edge of the flaps in order to remove the slop in the system.
Right now I insist on keeping the far end of the runway in sight over the
nose during the approach and flare which gives me a pretty flat nose
attitude at touch down. Now with any speed less than 75 KIAS I would block
out that over the nose picture. I usually have my engine set at 1,300 RPM +
or - a bit during the approach once I am on glide slope and leave it set at
that RPM to control descent rate until touch down.
*** My procedure is much like yours with similar numbers, I almost
always have someone with me and my field elevation is 1400' also, I sit very
tall in the cockpit. And I doubt that I an as good a pilot as you so it is
hard to compare.
If I could still have that same over the nose picture at 70 KIAS I would
consider making that additional flap sector notch to be a worth while
modification.
*** I only did the mod because I wanted to get the book recommended
28 deg's. and I was glad I did it. I think it was Scott Stearns that
recommended trying to get mire than 28 deg. I would if I had the extra room.
I hope this helps, Tim
OC
This message and any attachments are intended for the use of the addressee or addressees
only.
The unauthorised disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either in whole or
in part) of its
content is not permitted.
If you received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete it from
your system.
Emails can be altered and their integrity cannot be guaranteed by the sender.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
7/30/2014
Hello Jesse, You wrote:
1) I am lowering the trailing edge of the flaps and ailerons to a point
where a string, when stretched from the high point on the wing to the
trailing edge touches the hinge line.
That works for me, but I am curious as to why you are working so extensively
on this aspect of the wing shape?
2) Is this really the proper setting?
I think that it depends upon ones definition of proper. I would think
that there are two aspects of what is proper:
a) One aspect is what would give the absolute optimum aerodynamic
performance.
b) The other aspect is what gives the best, or at least an acceptable
appearance on the ground.
My thinking regarding a is that one could struggle mightily to obtain the
absolutely best possible fillet, wing, flap, aileron, and wing tip
configuration for an airplane built from a KIS TR-1 kit and the normal pilot
would probably not be able to detect the performance difference between that
optimum result and one that the normal builder would create just following
the plans as best he could.
One caveat to that statement is that I think that a significantly modified
wing to fuselage fillet such as Julian Bone did can make a significant
performance difference in the slow flight regime in order to overcome a too
pinched in wing to fuselage design.
Regarding b above that is a very personal aspect of building and owning an
EAB aircraft and I would not presume to coerce anyone else to my standards
in that regard as long as the appearance did not adversely affect safety.
3) .... a triangle shaped leading edge on the forward side of the wing next
to the fuselage. What does this do?
That triangle or wedge is called a stall strip. This web site will discuss
this, and many other related wing tweaking devices in some detail. See here:
http://www.airspeedalive.com/writings/stallcharacteristics.html
4) I thought, you being an engineer might have worked with such a
configuration and know the reason for such an extension.
Another aerodynamic tweak is to install a vortex generator on the fuselage
just forward of the wing. If you look real carefully at the pictures of the
Cirrus SR 22 at this web site:
http://cirrusaircraft.com/sr22/
you will see a little projection on the fuselage just forward of the wing
that looks like an antenna. This helps solve the same problem, too much
pinch in at the wing to fuselage juncture, that Julian Bone was solving with
his expanded wing to fuselage fillets.
I made a pair of these vortex generators out of aluminum and taped them to
the sides of my KIS TR-1 fuselage in various locations. I was having fun
testing them out, but got lazy one day and did not use fresh tape. The
result was that I lost one of the generators in the air and never got around
to making another one so the testing is in abeyance.
OC
==============================================
From: flyinisfun@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 10:33 PM
Subject: Questions:
O.C.,
I am reworking my wing fillets for the 3rd and I hope the last time. I
am lowering the trailing edge of the flaps and ailerons to a point where a
string, when stretched from the high point on the wing to the trailing edge
touches the hinge line. I had about 1/2" gap there before. I was going to
set the wing fillets and end cap's trailing edge to match the ailerons. Is
this really the proper setting? This is the setting on all factory builds I
checked.
Also, I have been looking at single engine Beechcraft and others that
have a triangle shaped leading edge on the forward side of the wing next to
the fuselage. What does this do? Does it increase lift at slower speeds?
I thought, you being an engineer might have worked with such a configuration
and know the reason for such an extenstion. Thanks for any information.
Jesse Wright
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Cirrus SR 22 Vortex Generator |
7/30/2014
Referred to previously. See here:
http://cirrusaircraft.com/static/s/img/2014/launch/sr22/SR22_960x480_1.jp
g
OC
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: N819PR Nose Gear Failure |
Bob; What model prop did you wind up buying from Catto? Does it have a
particular model number/designation?
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Owen Baker <bakerocb@cox.net> wrote:
> 7/24/2014
>
> Hello Galin, You wrote: =9C.... composite props and rain don't mix
very
> well....=9D
>
> Would you consider a prince propeller with leading edge protection?
>
> http://www.princeaircraft.com/
>
> OC
>
> ========================
=========
>
> *From:* Galin Hernandez <galinhdz@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 24, 2014 8:46 AM
> *To:* kis-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: KIS-List: N819PR Nose Gear Failure
>
> Initial check by the mechanic indicates no firewall damage at all, so
> the actual damage is not a big deal. Engine will be completely overhauled
,
> a new nose gear installed, a new propeller installed, some fiberglass wor
k
> done and the airplane will be better than before. The airplane is a whole
> lot stronger than it looks.
>
> The rear pin on the landing gear "H" bracket broke letting the entire
> assembly rotate 180 degrees backwards. Once this happened the main tube
> held up for a little bit but eventually collapsed under the different
> stress. I will ask Lyle if he can make the landing gear rear pin a little
> bigger to better withstand the landing loads.
>
> I will definitely look at moving the main gear an inch or two further
> forward but not sure if it can be done at this stage. The other option is
> to go with a CATTO composite prop, which is lighter than the SENSENICH
> aluminum prop I have, but composite props and rain don't mix very well an
d
> I fly real IMC.
>
>
> *
>
===========
nics.com/Navigator?KIS-List>
===========
===========
om/contribution>
===========
>
> *
>
>
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: N819PR Nose Gear Failure |
Galin,=0A=0ACatto didn't have a model number for the prop, he basically did
a custom based on engine horsepower, RPM, and airspeed for the aircraft.
=C2- He also included desired two blade or three blade configuration.=C2
- I went with three blade out of desire to have quite operation over powe
r performance because of Sharon's migraines.=C2- Catto now has the leadin
g edge protection on his props.=0A=0AI looked at Prince and can't remember
why I excluded them but it seems that their prop wasn't rated for the Lycom
ing 360 engine at that time.=C2- I also looked at MT Props but they were
a bit on the expensive side as I recall.=C2- I really liked their electri
c constant speed option though and would probably have gone with that if mo
ney weren't a primary concern.=0A=0AHope that helps,=0A=0ABob=0A=0A=0A =0A
=0A________________________________=0A From: Galin Hernandez <galinhdz@gmai
l.com>=0ATo: "kis-list@matronics.com" <kis-list@matronics.com> =0ASent: Wed
nesday, July 30, 2014 1:08 PM=0ASubject: Re: KIS-List: N819PR Nose Gear Fai
lure=0A =0A=0A=0ABob; What model prop did you wind up buying from Catto? D
oes it have a particular model number/designation?=0A=0A=0A=0AOn Thu, Jul 2
4, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Owen Baker <bakerocb@cox.net> wrote:=0A=0A7/24/2014 =0A
>=0A>Hello Galin, You wrote: =9C.... composite props and rain don't m
ix very =0Awell....=9D =0A>=0A>Would you consider a prince propeller
with leading edge protection? =0A>=0A>http://www.princeaircraft.com/ =0A>
=0A>OC =0A>=0A>====================
============== =C2- =0A>From: Galin Hernandez
=0A>Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 8:46 AM =0A>To: kis-list@matronics.com
=0A>Subject: Re: KIS-List: N819PR Nose Gear Failure =0A> Initial check by
the mechanic indicates no firewall =0Adamage at all, so the actual damage i
s not a big deal. Engine will be completely =0Aoverhauled, a new nose gear
installed, a new propeller installed, some =0Afiberglass work done and the
airplane will be better than before. The airplane =0Ais a whole lot stronge
r than it looks. =0A>=C2- =0A>The rear pin on the landing gear "H" bracke
t broke =0Aletting the entire assembly rotate 180 degrees backwards. Once t
his happened the =0Amain tube held up for a little bit but eventually colla
psed under the different =0Astress. I will ask Lyle if he can make the land
ing gear rear pin a little bigger =0Ato better withstand the landing loads.
=0A>=C2- =0A>I will definitely look at moving the main gear an inch or
=0Atwo further forward but not sure if it can be done at this stage. The ot
her =0Aoption is to go with a CATTO composite prop, which is lighter than t
he SENSENICH =0Aaluminum prop I have, but composite props and rain don't mi
x very well and I fly =0Areal IMC. =0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=C2- =0A>et="_blank"
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List=0Atp://forums.matronics.com=0A
====
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: N819PR Nose Gear Failure |
THANKS for the info Bob.
Is anybody running a fixed pitch composite 3 bladed prop on a TR-4? I want
some basic inputs from actual use before I make a decision. MT, Prince and
even Sensenich are high on my list.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Robert Reed <robertr237@att.net> wrote:
> Galin,
>
> Catto didn't have a model number for the prop, he basically did a custom
> based on engine horsepower, RPM, and airspeed for the aircraft. He also
> included desired two blade or three blade configuration. I went with thr
ee
> blade out of desire to have quite operation over power performance becaus
e
> of Sharon's migraines. Catto now has the leading edge protection on his
> props.
>
> I looked at Prince and can't remember why I excluded them but it seems
> that their prop wasn't rated for the Lycoming 360 engine at that time. I
> also looked at MT Props but they were a bit on the expensive side as I
> recall. I really liked their electric constant speed option though and
> would probably have gone with that if money weren't a primary concern.
>
> Hope that helps,
>
> Bob
>
>
> *From:* Galin Hernandez <galinhdz@gmail.com>
> *To:* "kis-list@matronics.com" <kis-list@matronics.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 30, 2014 1:08 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: KIS-List: N819PR Nose Gear Failure
>
> Bob; What model prop did you wind up buying from Catto? Does it have a
> particular model number/designation?
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Owen Baker <bakerocb@cox.net> wrote:
>
> 7/24/2014
>
> Hello Galin, You wrote: =9C.... composite props and rain don't mix
very
> well....=9D
>
> Would you consider a prince propeller with leading edge protection?
>
> http://www.princeaircraft.com/
>
> OC
>
> ========================
=========
>
> *From:* Galin Hernandez <galinhdz@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 24, 2014 8:46 AM
> *To:* kis-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: KIS-List: N819PR Nose Gear Failure
>
> Initial check by the mechanic indicates no firewall damage at all, so
> the actual damage is not a big deal. Engine will be completely overhauled
,
> a new nose gear installed, a new propeller installed, some fiberglass wor
k
> done and the airplane will be better than before. The airplane is a whole
> lot stronger than it looks.
>
> The rear pin on the landing gear "H" bracket broke letting the entire
> assembly rotate 180 degrees backwards. Once this happened the main tube
> held up for a little bit but eventually collapsed under the different
> stress. I will ask Lyle if he can make the landing gear rear pin a little
> bigger to better withstand the landing loads.
>
> I will definitely look at moving the main gear an inch or two further
> forward but not sure if it can be done at this stage. The other option is
> to go with a CATTO composite prop, which is lighter than the SENSENICH
> aluminum prop I have, but composite props and rain don't mix very well an
d
> I fly real IMC.
>
>
> *
>
> et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List <http://www.mat
ronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List>
> tp://forums.matronics.com <http://forums.matronics.com>
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution <http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution>
>
> *
>
>
> *http://www.matro://forums.matronics.com/ <http://forums.matronics.com/>"
target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://forums. <http://forums.>==
=======
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
===========
nics.com/Navigator?KIS-List>
===========
===========
om/contribution>
===========
>
> *
>
>
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | N819PR Nose Gear Failure |
Galin,
You might talk to Scott Stearns, he had a Prince prop on his carbon TR-1C
with a 220 HP O-360 and has changed to a different prop. A friend got a
three blade Catto for his RV7 that took six months to get but he likes it.
The Prince P-Tip is not the most efficient design and I'm sure you know that
two blades are more efficient than three, as Bob mentioned, assuming you
have ground clearance. I also believe that MT has a mandatory 10 yr.
overhaul on it's adjustable props. That cost allot also.
Tim
_____
From: owner-kis-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-kis-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Galin Hernandez
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: KIS-List: N819PR Nose Gear Failure
THANKS for the info Bob.
Is anybody running a fixed pitch composite 3 bladed prop on a TR-4? I want
some basic inputs from actual use before I make a decision. MT, Prince and
even Sensenich are high on my list.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Robert Reed <robertr237@att.net> wrote:
Galin,
Catto didn't have a model number for the prop, he basically did a custom
based on engine horsepower, RPM, and airspeed for the aircraft. He also
included desired two blade or three blade configuration. I went with three
blade out of desire to have quite operation over power performance because
of Sharon's migraines. Catto now has the leading edge protection on his
props.
I looked at Prince and can't remember why I excluded them but it seems that
their prop wasn't rated for the Lycoming 360 engine at that time. I also
looked at MT Props but they were a bit on the expensive side as I recall. I
really liked their electric constant speed option though and would probably
have gone with that if money weren't a primary concern.
Hope that helps,
Bob
From: Galin Hernandez <galinhdz@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: KIS-List: N819PR Nose Gear Failure
Bob; What model prop did you wind up buying from Catto? Does it have a
particular model number/designation?
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Owen Baker <bakerocb@cox.net> wrote:
7/24/2014
Hello Galin, You wrote: ".... composite props and rain don't mix very
well...."
Would you consider a prince propeller with leading edge protection?
http://www.princeaircraft.com/
OC
=================================
From: Galin <mailto:galinhdz@gmail.com> Hernandez
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 8:46 AM
Subject: Re: KIS-List: N819PR Nose Gear Failure
Initial check by the mechanic indicates no firewall damage at all, so the
actual damage is not a big deal. Engine will be completely overhauled, a new
nose gear installed, a new propeller installed, some fiberglass work done
and the airplane will be better than before. The airplane is a whole lot
stronger than it looks.
The rear pin on the landing gear "H" bracket broke letting the entire
assembly rotate 180 degrees backwards. Once this happened the main tube held
up for a little bit but eventually collapsed under the different stress. I
will ask Lyle if he can make the landing gear rear pin a little bigger to
better withstand the landing loads.
I will definitely look at moving the main gear an inch or two further
forward but not sure if it can be done at this stage. The other option is to
go with a CATTO composite prop, which is lighter than the SENSENICH aluminum
prop I have, but composite props and rain don't mix very well and I fly real
IMC.
et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matro://forums.matronics.com/" target="_blank"
rel="nofollow">http://forums.=========
et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?KIS-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection
is active.
http://www.avast.com
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|