 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
GrummanDude
Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 926
Location: Auburn, CA
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 10:26 pm Post subject: Weight and Balance |
 |
|
I mentioned I found a few discrepancies in the moments used in the W&B
sheet from the factory.
Those with AG5Bs, the engine weight is the same as the AA5B although
the alternator, included in the weight, is 2 lbs heavier. Obviously,
actual values were not determined. The nose strut shock assembly got a
pound lighter but the nose wheel assembly got 1.3 pounds heavier.
Paint is 14 pounds heavier. Pitot is heavier. No change in the wheel
fairings even though the AG5B has fiberglass wheel pants and the AA5B
has plastic ones. Headliner weight in the AG5B is the same as the
weight used in the original AA5 Traveler even though the AA5 headliner
is just cloth strung on aluminum tubes; The AG5B has an inch of foam
glued in place under the fabric.
The Cargo CG is the parting line between the top of the seat back and
the back of the seat bottom when the seats are laying down in the cargo
configuration. I could buy that.
The Baggage CG is the geometric center of the baggage area.
The assumption being equal loading about the centers.
Regarding the front seat arm, I measured it today. It appears the arm
for the front seat pilot and copilot is for the most forward location
of the seat. In the aft location, the arm is 7 inches further back.
Sitting there, it looked to me like the center of the seat pan was used
(by the factory) for the seat CG. Just trying to visualize the center
of mass, I would have moved the CG back an inch or so.
Word of caution: If your loading is near the aft CG using the sample
loading in the W&B, moving the seat to the middle of it's travel will
make the CG go past the aft CG limit.
The coat hook is at 158 inches
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
_________________
Gary
AuCountry Aviation
Home of Team Grumman |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Discover
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 429
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 5:05 am Post subject: Weight and Balance |
|
|
Gary,
This thread is very interesting to me as I had some doubts about my AG5B W&B figures from the factory.
I removed the rear headliner and weighed it. It weighed 4.5 lbs. Don't have the breakdown in front of me but most of that weight was in the thicker, yellow foam. The weight of the factory main wheel and leg fairings is 17 lbs. The rear baggage floor carpet was 5.13 lbs the hat rack 5.75 lbs all the other floor carpet 7 lbs. The 12.13 lbs of wool carpet was a bad idea from the ex Commander Aircraft execs...
Does 81" sound right for the wingtip light. That is the ARM my IA used when installing the Boom Beam lights
My OEM alternator weighed 12.25 lbs while the replacement Plane Power weighed 9.8. My shocks weghed 5.24 steps 5.05
Do these compare with your findings?
Ned
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GrummanDude
Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 926
Location: Auburn, CA
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:16 pm Post subject: Weight and Balance |
|
|
Ned,
=========> follow my responses
Â
This thread is very interesting to me as I had some doubts about my
AG5B W&B figures from the factory.
Â
I removed the rear headliner and weighed it. It weighed 4.5 lbs. Don't
have the breakdown in front of me but most of that
weight was in the thicker, yellow foam.
The weight of the factory main wheel and leg fairings is 17 lbs.
======> Can you break out the wheel fairings from the wheels? My
database treats them separately.
The rear baggage floor carpet was 5.13 lbs
======> Just the carpet in the baggage area??????
the hat rack 5.75 lbs
=======>
all the other floor carpet 7 lbs.
=======> what do you mean? Is this different from the following?
The 12.13 lbs of wool carpet was a bad idea from the ex Commander
Aircraft execs...
=======> from what I've found, the average basic airframe weight of the
AG5B (later ones, anyway), weigh 80 to 100 lbs more than a 70s Tiger.
But, then, a 70s Tiger doesn't have bondo on the entire side of the
plane.
Â
Does 81" sound right for the wingtip light. That is the ARM my IA used
when installing the Boom Beam lights
=======> sounds right. I'm showing the leading edge of the wing at
75.68 inches. What is odd is that the CG for the landing light from the
factory is 101.96 inches. The main gea
r wheel assembly is supposed to
be at 100.15 inches. That would put the landing light behind the main
gear.
Â
My OEM alternator weighed 12.25 lbs while the replacement Plane Power
weighed 9.8.
=======> I'm showing the weight for the OEM alternator at 12.7 lbs.
10.10 for the Plane Power.
My shocks weghed 5.24
=======> that is the weight I have for the last AG5Bs. The 70s shock
assembly is 4.31 lbs.
steps 5.05
========> no change.
Â
Do these compare with your
findings?
Â
Ned
===================
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
_________________
Gary
AuCountry Aviation
Home of Team Grumman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GrummanDude
Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 926
Location: Auburn, CA
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 6:09 pm Post subject: Weight and Balance |
|
|
Ned, send me your W&B stuff, the original stuff, and let me create a
database page for it.
I'm going to modify my W&B sample loading to reflect the
pilots/copilots CG at the extremes. I think it was a bad decision not
to include both limits in the original loading paperwork. Who'd be at
fault if a pilot used the sample loading and then crashed because both
front seat passengers fly at the aft location and loaded the plane to
what would have been a safe loading?
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
_________________
Gary
AuCountry Aviation
Home of Team Grumman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
az_gila
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 99
Location: Tucson, AZ
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 6:46 pm Post subject: Weight and Balance |
|
|
I would presume that the FAA would require a safety factor built into
these limits, just like the +10% (or was it +15%) on your Vne dive tests.
Is this not the case? Do you loose stability EXACTLY at the aft limit?
gil A
At 07:01 PM 6/20/2009, you wrote:
| Quote: |
Ned, send me your W&B stuff, the original stuff, and let me create a
database page for it.
I'm going to modify my W&B sample loading to reflect the
pilots/copilots CG at the extremes. I think it was a bad decision
not to include both limits in the original loading paperwork. Who'd
be at fault if a pilot used the sample loading and then crashed
because both front seat passengers fly at the aft location and
loaded the plane to what would have been a safe loading?
|
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GrummanDude
Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 926
Location: Auburn, CA
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 7:10 pm Post subject: Weight and Balance |
|
|
Not sure. But, we can be assured, if it's FAA approved, it has to be
OK. Right?
--
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
_________________
Gary
AuCountry Aviation
Home of Team Grumman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flyv35b(at)minetfiber.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 20, 2009 7:32 pm Post subject: Weight and Balance |
|
|
Right On! Does that go for the Airbus also?
---
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rcmutz(at)msn.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 21, 2009 4:37 am Post subject: Weight and Balance |
|
|
Not sure which regs the Grumman products were certified under C but I would consult with FAR 23 or CAR 3 for how they define the aft limit. There is probably some percentage forward of neutral stablity that they used in defining where the aft limit should be set. In the case of the F-16 C I believe at its aft limit it has 7% RELAXED static stability C 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 C with quad redundant flight control computers C 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. [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GrummanDude
Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 926
Location: Auburn, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:50 am Post subject: Weight and Balance |
|
|
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.
--
| | - The Matronics TeamGrumman-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List |
|
_________________
Gary
AuCountry Aviation
Home of Team Grumman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
