Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - fore and aft loading vs. performance

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

fore and aft loading vs. performance

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Commander-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

steve2(at)sover.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 5:03 am Post subject: fore and aft loading vs. performance

Gang,

  

 I know in THEORY that an aft loading affects cruise  and stall speeds, and the book answer as to why.

  

 Has anyone messed around with loading  configurations and seen a real world difference? How much?

  

 Seing as how we're well to the front, and could go  out of the envelope in certain configurations, I'm curious as to whether  ballasting could actually pay off by increased efficiency.

  

 Was it cmd Gordon that mentioned something about  ballast a couple threads back? What's the history on that?

  

 Steve

   [quote][b]

CloudCraft(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 7:37 am Post subject: fore and aft loading vs. performance

In a message dated 27-Jul-07 06:04:40 Pacific Daylight Time, steve2(at)sover.net writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Seing as how we're well to the front, and could go out of the envelope in certain configurations, I'm curious as to whether ballasting could actually pay off by increased efficiency. 	


  

 As for the history of ballasting, as I understand it, when enhancements came about such as the Shrike nose, 3 blade props and pilot doors, the added weight brought the C.G. too far forward.

  

 The factory began placing lead plates on the aft tail stringers, and that's what's been done with pre-Shrike models when noses, doors and panel mount avionics were put on as after market mods.

  

 There is the anecdotal tale of Mr. RPM doing a demo for a flying missionary group who were interested in the MR. RPM conversion of the AC-680-FL(P).  They had a high altitude / short field requirement that had to be demonstrated so MR. RPM did the trials at Big Bear Lake ... and loaded for maximum aft C.G. to achieve the performance needed.

  

  

  

 Wing Commander Gordon

  

  



Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.

  [quote][b]

steve2(at)sover.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 10:05 am Post subject: fore and aft loading vs. performance

Do the Shrikes then come out of the factory with lead ballast?

 [quote]   ---

CloudCraft(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 10:10 am Post subject: fore and aft loading vs. performance

In a message dated 27-Jul-07 11:06:37 Pacific Daylight Time, steve2(at)sover.net writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Do the Shrikes then come out of the factory with lead ballast? 	


 To my knowledge, yes.

  

 WCG



Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.

  [quote][b]

steve2(at)sover.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:46 pm Post subject: fore and aft loading vs. performance

David,

  

 I was wondering about you guys. You've got the  camera installation and a Colemill conversion, if I remember right. Any idea how  much lead, and where it was put?

  

 As for the SPAM-LOW, maybe its the list's way of  telling me to quit sending so many messages. (I'm almost done,  honest.)

 [quote]   ---

dowens(at)aerialviewpoint
Guest

Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 8:25 am Post subject: fore and aft loading vs. performance

The tailcone comes off, and there it sits... appx.  80lbs I think...

  

  

  

  

 David Owens

Aerial  Viewpoint

N14AV

AC-500A-Colemill

   [quote][b]

BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 4:15 am Post subject: fore and aft loading vs. performance

Good Morning Robert,

  

 Since you are pondering such a "weighty" subject, are you aware that  someone many years ago managed to get a movable weight approved for use in a  Cessna 140?

  

 The weight was on a rail and could be cranked back and forth via a cable  and crank affair.

  

 The idea was that it could be placed all the way in the rear to allow  landings on muddy fields or with heavy brake use without nosing over quite as  easily.

  

 Never seemed like a thing of much use or practicality to me, but I wonder  if it might not be useful for those situations where extreme range or high speed  is important to you Commander drivers?

 Happy  Skies,



Old Bob

AKA

Bob Siegfried

Ancient Aviator

Stearman  N3977A

Brookeridge Air Park LL22

Downers Grove, IL 60516

630  985-8503



  

 In a message dated 7/27/2007 1:22:31 P.M. Central Daylight Time, Robert  writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		     

We    are currently â€œWeighingâ€ the proâ€™s/conâ€™s of the CG location on N414C when we    finally get her on the scales.  So much equipment came out of the    empennage mounted racks that the CG has likely come forward some.  This    is a good thing for single engine control- but a bad thing for cruise    speedsâ€¦.  This airplane already had 70lbs of lead ballast weight bolted    to the very tip of the tailâ€¦.   

    

Robert    Randazzo   

 	


 





Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.

kamala(at)MSN.COM
Guest

Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 4:34 am Post subject: fore and aft loading vs. performance

you might check with gary (at) commander aero. i know they have had experience with updating equipment in the commander line and in doing so delt with the w & b problems presented by that action. mason

 [quote]  From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com

Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2007 08:15:06 -0400

Subject: Re: fore and aft loading vs. performance

To: commander-list(at)matronics.com

     Good Morning Robert,

 Since you are pondering such a "weighty" subject, are you aware that someone many years ago managed to get a movable weight approved for use in a Cessna 140?

 The weight was on a rail and could be cranked back and forth via a cable and crank affair.

 The idea was that it could be placed all the way in the rear to allow landings on muddy fields or with heavy brake use without nosing over quite as easily.

 Never seemed like a thing of much use or practicality to me, but I wonder if it might not be useful for those situations where extreme range or high speed is important to you Commander drivers?

 Happy Skies,

Old Bob

AKA

Bob Siegfried

Ancient Aviator

Stearman N3977A

Brookeridge Air Park LL22

Downers Grove, IL 60516

630 985-8503

 In a message dated 7/27/2007 1:22:31 P.M. Central Daylight Time, Robert writes:

  	  Quote: 	

We are currently “Weighing” the pro’s/con’s of the CG location on N414C when we finally get her on the scales.  So much equipment came out of the empennage mounted racks that the CG has likely come forward some.  This is a good thing for single engine control- but a bad thing for cruise speeds….  This airplane already had 70lbs of lead ballast weight bolted to the very tip of the tail…. 

Robert Randazzo 

   Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.

 	  Quote: 	

" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List

p://forums.matronics.com

[b]

rsrandazzo(at)precisionma
Guest

Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:22 pm Post subject: fore and aft loading vs. performance

Bob-  

   

Iâ€™m not sure Iâ€™d want such a rig on a commanderâ€¦.  

   

Can you imagine how many times youâ€™d rotate and wonder, â€œhmmmmâ€¦Â  I wonder if I remembered to latch that thing in place.â€  

   

KLUNKÂ Â  trim trim trimâ€¦.  

   

Apparently I forgot againâ€¦  

   

Robert Randazzo  

       

From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of BobsV35B(at)aol.com

 Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 5:15 AM

 To: commander-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: fore and aft loading vs. performance  

  

  

           

Good Morning Robert,  

    

   

    

Since you are pondering such a "weighty" subject, are you aware that someone many years ago managed to get a movable weight approved for use in a Cessna 140?  

    

   

    

The weight was on a rail and could be cranked back and forth via a cable and crank affair.  

    

   

    

The idea was that it could be placed all the way in the rear to allow landings on muddy fields or with heavy brake use without nosing over quite as easily.  

    

   

    

Never seemed like a thing of much use or practicality to me, but I wonder if it might not be useful for those situations where extreme range or high speed is important to you Commander drivers?  

    

Happy Skies,

 

 Old Bob

 AKA

 Bob Siegfried

 Ancient Aviator

 Stearman N3977A

 Brookeridge Air Park LL22

 Downers Grove, IL 60516

 630 985-8503  

  

    

   

    

In a message dated 7/27/2007 1:22:31 P.M. Central Daylight Time, Robert writes:  

   	  Quote: 	
		    

We are currently â€œWeighingâ€ the proâ€™s/conâ€™s of the CG location on N414C when we finally get her on the scales.  So much equipment came out of the empennage mounted racks that the CG has likely come forward some.  This is a good thing for single engine control- but a bad thing for cruise speedsâ€¦.  This airplane already had 70lbs of lead ballast weight bolted to the very tip of the tailâ€¦.  

   

Robert Randazzo  

   	
  

  

  



 

         

  

  

   	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4  



 

 __________ NOD32 2430 (20070731) Information __________

 

  

        [quote][b]

BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 4:52 am Post subject: fore and aft loading vs. performance

In a message dated 8/2/2007 1:23:10 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  rsrandazzo(at)precisionmanuals.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		     

Bob-   

    

Iâ€™m    not sure Iâ€™d want such a rig on a commanderâ€¦.   

    

Can    you imagine how many times youâ€™d rotate and wonder, â€œhmmmmâ€¦  I wonder if    I remembered to latch that thing in place.â€   

    

KLUNK      trim trim trimâ€¦.   

    

Apparently    I forgot againâ€¦   

    

Robert    Randazzo 	


 

Hey! I'm with you. I never had one in a 140 either.

  

 Happy  Skies,



Old Bob

AKA

Bob Siegfried

Ancient Aviator

Stearman  N3977A

Brookeridge Air Park LL22

Downers Grove, IL 60516

630  985-8503



Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.

  [quote][b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Commander-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum