---------------------------------------------------------- TeamGrumman-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 06/22/09: 1 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 11:50 AM - Re: Re: Weight and Balance (teamgrumman@AOL.COM) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 11:50:57 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Weight and Balance From: teamgrumman@AOL.COM Just in case you didn't read the limits, they are in your Weight and Balance. It's 92.5 inches aft in a Tiger. I really don't care how the FAA and Grumman-American came to that conclusion. Their reasoning for choosing those limits is not my concern. My point is, and was, the sample loading given in the W&B for ALL of the Grumman American and Gulfstream-American AA5x aircraft uses a forward location for the front seat passengers. If one religiously does his weight and balance (using the sample loading moment arms in the W&B) and is thinking he is legal when loaded in a loading configuration that places him 1 inch forward of the aft CG, he will be aft of that CG, i.e., flying in an unapproved loading configuration, when he and his co-pilot get in the plane and move their seats to the aft location. I know two pilots who use the sample loading sheet as if it were gospel. There is nothing in the W&B sample loading to differentiate between fore and aft pilot/co-pilot seat locations. -----Original Message----- From: Richard Mutzman Sent: Sun, Jun 21, 2009 5:25 am Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Weight and Balance Not sure which regs the Grumman products were certified under, but I would consult with FAR 23 or CAR 3 for how they define the aft limit. There is probably some per centage forward of neutral stablity that they used in definingwhere the aft limit should be set. In the case of the F-16, I believe at its aft limit it has 7% RELAXED static stability, but a flight control system that constantly moves the tail surface to maintain the pointy end forward. The B-2 was neutral to slightly unstable, with quad redundant flight control computers, and the F-22 is unstable with triplex computers to keep in pointed in the right direction. Richard Mutzman N399RM Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail. See how. ========================== ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message teamgrumman-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/TeamGrumman-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/teamgrumman-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/teamgrumman-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.