Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:14 AM - Baffles (teamgrumman@aol.com)
2. 02:54 PM - Re: Baffles (Ian Matterface)
3. 11:52 PM - Re: Baffles (teamgrumman@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 |
|
Interesting discovery today. I'm installing an 8406 oil cooler on a
Cheetah using the Fletchair STC. I decided to make my own baffles
instead of modifying the baffles per the STC. In the process, I
discovered the left rear baffle (the one the oil cooler mounts to) on
the Cheetah/Traverler (75) is about 1/2 to 5/8 inch too short. That
is, it's too short for the given gap to the cowling. The left rear
baffle fits well with #4 cylinder baffle which means the #4 cylinder
baffle is too short too. I've known for a long time that the #4
cylinder baffle is made 3/8 of an inch too tall where it overlaps the
#2 cylinder baffle, but always figured it was the right height along
the aft edge where it joins the left rear baffle. If you look at the
left rear baffle on a Tiger, you can see it is about 1/2 inch too high
compared to the #4 cylinder baffle. There is a serious mismatch in
this corner. The left rear baffle on a Tiger is the right height. The
left rear baffle on a Cheetah is too short. The #4 cylinder baffle is
just totally wrong - for either installation. What's really
interesting is, I have the blue print and the baffles are made to the
blue print. Conclusion: the original baffles were poorly designed or
not designed at all, just installed as quickly and cheaply as possible.
I have about 80 hours in fitting the baffles to my new cowling.
- - - - Oh, and, by-the-way, The structural analysis is complete on
the cowling. Facter of safety is 1.7 to 1.9 . . . . . . about the same
as the Saturn V that went to the moon. To the moon, Alice. (OK, so,
who knows where that comes from?)
ps, the report for the FAA was about 25 dollars per page.
________________________________________________________________________
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
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 |
|
Could this be that the rear Baffles for the early AA5 and 75AA5 and A's
are almost one and the same. I have two new R/H rear baffles that the
P/N's one them say one is a AA5 the other AA5A the only difference being
one small extra hole and the different profiles of the flexible baffles.
Ian
MatAir
----- Original Message -----
From: teamgrumman@aol.com
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 8:13 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Baffles
Interesting discovery today. I'm installing an 8406 oil cooler on a
Cheetah using the Fletchair STC. I decided to make my own baffles
instead of modifying the baffles per the STC. In the process, I
discovered the left rear baffle (the one the oil cooler mounts to) on
the Cheetah/Traverler (75) is about 1/2 to 5/8 inch too short. That
is, it's too short for the given gap to the cowling. The left rear
baffle fits well with #4 cylinder baffle which means the #4 cylinder
baffle is too short too. I've known for a long time that the #4
cylinder baffle is made 3/8 of an inch too tall where it overlaps the
#2 cylinder baffle, but always figured it was the right height along
the aft edge where it joins the left rear baffle. If you look at the
left rear baffle on a Tiger, you can see it is about 1/2 inch too high
compared to the #4 cylinder baffle. There is a serious mismatch in
this corner. The left rear baffle on a Tiger is the right height. The
left rear baffle on a Cheetah is too short. The #4 cylinder baffle is
just totally wrong - for either installation. What's really
interesting is, I have the blue print and the baffles are made to the
blue print. Conclusion: the original baffles were poorly designed or
not designed at all, just installed as quickly and cheaply as possible.
I have about 80 hours in fitting the baffles to my new cowling.
- - - - Oh, and, by-the-way, The structural analysis is complete on
the cowling. Facter of safety is 1.7 to 1.9 . . . . . . about the same
as the Saturn V that went to the moon. To the moon, Alice. (OK, so,
who knows where that comes from?)
ps, the report for the FAA was about 25 dollars per page.
________________________________________________________________________
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
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 |
|
There is no doubt they reused the same pieces for different shaped
cowlings. I mean, why would anyone expect anything else?
-----Original Message-----
From: i.r.m@btinternet.com
Sent: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Baffles
Could this be that the rear Baffles for the early AA5 and 75AA5
and A's are almost one and the same. I have two new R/H rear baffles
that the P/N's one them say one is a AA5 the other AA5A the only
difference being one small extra hole and the differentprofiles of the
flexible baffles.
Ian
MatAir
----- Original Message ----- From: teamgrumman@aol.com
To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 8:13 AM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Baffles
Interesting discovery today. I'm installing an 8406 oil cooler on a
Cheetah using the Fletchair STC. I decided to make my own baffles
instead of modifying the baffles per the STC. In the process, I
discovered the left rear baffle (the one the oil cooler mounts to) on
the Cheetah/Traverler (75) is about 1/2 to 5/8 inch too short. That
is, it's too short for the given gap to the cowling. The left rear
baffle fits well with #4 cylinder baffle which means the #4 cylinder
baffle is too short too. I've known for a long time that the #4
cylinder baffle is made 3/8 of an inch too tall where it overlaps the
#2 cylinder baffle, but always figured it was the right height along
the aft edge where it joins the left rear baffle. If you look at the
left rear baffle on a Tiger, you can see it is about 1/2 inch too high
compared to the #4 cylinder baffle. There is a serious mismatch in
this corner. The left rear baffle on a Tiger is the right height. The
left rear baffle on a Cheetah is too short. The #4 cylinder baffle is
just totally wrong - for either installation. What's really
interesting is, I have the blue print and the baffles are made to the
blue print. Conclusion: the original baffles were poorly designed or
not designed at all, just installed as quickly and cheaply as possible.
I have about 80 hours in fitting the baffles to my new cowling.
- - - - Oh, and, by-the-way, The structural analysis is complete on
the cowling. Facter of safety is 1.7 to 1.9 . . . . . . about the same
as the Saturn V that went to the moon. To the moon, Alice. (OK, so,
who knows where that comes from?)
ps, the report for the FAA was about 25 dollars per page.
________________________________________________________________________
across the web, free AOL Mail and nbsp; Features Subscriptions
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.mp;
available via
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
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! --
|