Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:18 AM - Re: Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny Thompson (James, Clive R)
2. 04:14 AM - Re: more prop test info (Dave)
3. 04:42 AM - Re: Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny Thompson (Brian Whittingham)
4. 05:39 AM - Re: Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny Thompson (EAFerguson@aol.com)
5. 08:47 AM - Re: Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny Thompson (James, Clive R)
6. 01:11 PM - Re: more prop test info (Dave)
7. 01:42 PM - Re: Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny Thompson (Johnny Thompson)
8. 03:48 PM - Actual diameter of main and nose tires (Bill Strahan)
9. 04:28 PM - Re: Actual diameter of main and nose tires (IFLYSMODEL@AOL.COM)
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: | Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny Thompson |
Can't you just use the standard spreadsheet and take the engine weight
off at the old station and put it back at the new one?
I used this approach to see what the difference was with the new mount
that Arion send me. Early indications was the engine would be just over
an inch forward of it's old position so I used 30 mm
If you take the two lines in yellow out you can see the resultant C of G
move back. I was surprised how little the C of G moved with engine
position movement.
Or am I missing something?
Regards, Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Whittingham
Sent: 14 August 2009 04:01
Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny
Thompson
All,
Can anybody tell me what the difference in C.G. between an aircraft
with the shorter motor mount verses the longer motor mount is? Has any
aircraft had one and then switched to the other?
Johnny,
You had a write up in a recent Lightning newsletter about Greg's
version 2.0 Lightning. I had flown his first version previously. Do
you know if he switched motor mounts to the longer, or is that entire
C.G. movement due to the lighter fuselage than the original? I am
working on a new article for the newsletter and these things would help
me to figure a couple of things out. Thanks, Brian W.
________________________________
Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you. Try Bing now.
<http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
HYCB_
BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1>
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: more prop test info |
Buz
perfect, I'll do mine every 6 inches and get it to you, it may be
interesting
Thanks Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: N1BZRich@aol.com
To: lightning-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 7:14 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: more prop test info
Dave,
I am on another trip (this time in NC on other business) and it
will be several days or more before I get home and can get to that. But
will be happy to do so. I will try to get the airplane as level as
possible, then will start by measuring the top of the engine to see how
level that is. Then measurements will be based on the prop being
horizontal. Will that work?
Buz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
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 |
|
| Subject: | Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny Thompson |
Clive=2C You're right=2C I can just do the math on to get the CG change b
etween the long and short mounts. I do remember a post where Buzz said tha
t the cg did not move a lot with the new mount. The other part is that I j
ust didn't know whether or not Greg's plane had the newer mount. I had als
o forgotten about the lead weights that he added. I could also do the math
on this=2C but I'd need to know the weight and stations of the fuselage an
d wings separately. That way I could "virtually" change out the old fusela
ge with the new. Three inches of cg movement is huge=2C but remember when
we're talking about so much extra weight throughout the fuselage and all of
it aft of the cg=2C then it starts adding up quick. Thanks for the quick
responses guys. Brian W.
> Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny
Thompson
> Date: Fri=2C 14 Aug 2009 08:15:59 +0100
> From: clive.james@uk.bp.com
> To: lightning-list@matronics.com
>
> Can't you just use the standard spreadsheet and take the engine weight
> off at the old station and put it back at the new one?
>
> I used this approach to see what the difference was with the new mount
> that Arion send me. Early indications was the engine would be just over
> an inch forward of it's old position so I used 30 mm
>
> If you take the two lines in yellow out you can see the resultant C of G
> move back. I was surprised how little the C of G moved with engine
> position movement.
>
> Or am I missing something?
>
> Regards=2C Clive
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
> Whittingham
> Sent: 14 August 2009 04:01
> To: lightning-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny
> Thompson
>
> All=2C
> Can anybody tell me what the difference in C.G. between an aircraft
> with the shorter motor mount verses the longer motor mount is? Has any
> aircraft had one and then switched to the other?
> Johnny=2C
> You had a write up in a recent Lightning newsletter about Greg's
> version 2.0 Lightning. I had flown his first version previously. Do
> you know if he switched motor mounts to the longer=2C or is that entire
> C.G. movement due to the lighter fuselage than the original? I am
> working on a new article for the newsletter and these things would help
> me to figure a couple of things out. Thanks=2C Brian W.
>
> ________________________________
>
> Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you. Try Bing now.
> <http://www.bing.com/cashback?form=MSHYCB&publ=WLHMTAG&crea=TEXT_MS
HYCB_
> BackToSchool_Cashback_BTSCashback_1x1>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your vacation photos on your phone!
http://windowsliveformobile.com/en-us/photos/default.aspx?&OCID=0809TL-HM
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: | Re: Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny Thompson |
In a message dated 8/14/2009 3:19:12 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
clive.james@uk.bp.com writes:
Can't you just use the standard spreadsheet and take the engine weight
off at the old station and put it back at the new one?
I used this approach to see what the difference was with the new mount
that Arion send me. Early indications was the engine would be just over
an inch forward of it's old position so I used 30 mm
If you take the two lines in yellow out you can see the resultant C of G
move back. I was surprised how little the C of G moved with engine
position movement.
Or am I missing something?
Regards, Clive
Don't forget to move the prop, spinner and any other accessories not
included in the engine weight.
Earl
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: | Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny Thompson |
That's a good point, WR Earl, these will be at a different station of
course, further forward more effect.
With such changes why aren't you re-weighing?
CJ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
EAFerguson@aol.com
Sent: 14 August 2009 13:33
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Lightning C.G. Change? + question for
Johnny Thompson
In a message dated 8/14/2009 3:19:12 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
clive.james@uk.bp.com writes:
Can't you just use the standard spreadsheet and take the engine
weight
off at the old station and put it back at the new one?
I used this approach to see what the difference was with the new
mount
that Arion send me. Early indications was the engine would be
just over
an inch forward of it's old position so I used 30 mm
If you take the two lines in yellow out you can see the
resultant C of G
move back. I was surprised how little the C of G moved with
engine
position movement.
Or am I missing something?
Regards, Clive
Don't forget to move the prop, spinner and any other accessories not
included in the engine weight.
Earl
________________________________
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: more prop test info |
Buz
Here is what I came up with
prop hub at zero degrees
Blade 1 Blade 2
6" in from tip 21 degrees ---- 21.25 degrees
12" in from tip 26 degrees ---- 26 degrees
18" in from tip 30.5 degrees ---- 31 degrees
it is hard to get an accurate measurement at 18" because of the contour
thanks Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave
To: lightning-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 6:12 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: more prop test info
Buz
perfect, I'll do mine every 6 inches and get it to you, it may be
interesting
Thanks Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: N1BZRich@aol.com
To: lightning-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 7:14 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: more prop test info
Dave,
I am on another trip (this time in NC on other business) and it
will be several days or more before I get home and can get to that. But
will be happy to do so. I will try to get the airplane as level as
possible, then will start by measuring the top of the engine to see how
level that is. Then measurements will be based on the prop being
horizontal. Will that work?
Buz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.mat
ronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
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: Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny Thompson |
Brian
Greg's CG moved forward 3.5" but remember his was the 2nd to fly and
many, many changes have taken place. He had 1 pound of led in the rudder
the glass was heaver in the rear so he had to put 13 pounds of lead on
the very front of the engine case. Then removing the lead weight forward
and aft,new fuselage, extended eng mount he now has moved the CG forward
3.5 inches.
In the next two weeks I will do a new W&B on my aircraft. I have
installed the 30 gallon tanks and will add weight to the front of the
Eng to compensate for not having the extended mount. Will let you know.
Johnny
----- Original Message -----
From: Brian Whittingham
To: lightning-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 8:00 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning C.G. Change? + question for Johnny
Thompson
All, Can anybody tell me what the difference in C.G. between an
aircraft with the shorter motor mount verses the longer motor mount is?
Has any aircraft had one and then switched to the other?Johnny, You
had a write up in a recent Lightning newsletter about Greg's version 2.0
Lightning. I had flown his first version previously. Do you know if he
switched motor mounts to the longer, or is that entire C.G. movement due
to the lighter fuselage than the original? I am working on a new
article for the newsletter and these things would help me to figure a
couple of things out. Thanks, Brian W.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Get back to school stuff for them and cashback for you. Try Bing now.
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: | Actual diameter of main and nose tires |
Can anyone tell me a source for the diameter of our tires? I've been searching
for quite a while, and get numbers of 11" to 13.5" for a 5.00X5 aircraft tire.
Thanks,
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=257710#257710
Message 9
| 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: Actual diameter of main and nose tires |
Hey Bill: I can tell you that the Air Trac tires removed from my lightning
currently measure 13 inches not installed or inflated. So I would assume
that the 13.5" figure is quite close to actual.
Lynn Nelsen
N13LN
In a message dated 8/14/2009 6:48:38 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
bill@gdsx.com writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Bill Strahan" <bill@gdsx.com>
Can anyone tell me a source for the diameter of our tires? I've been
searching for quite a while, and get numbers of 11" to 13.5" for a 5.00X5
aircraft tire.
Thanks,
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=257710#257710
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! --
|