cubdriver2
FRIEND
upstate NY
My Pa11 would land and takeoff shorter and slower from the back seat
Glenn
Glenn
My Pa11 would land and takeoff shorter and slower from the back seat
Glenn
The tail doesn't have to push down as much in order to keep the nose up. Therefore wing lift is not wasted counteracting the down-push of the tail. Not as much drag from either wing or tail. And of course, pitch stability is reduced. Again, I'm not an aero engr, so I realize this is way-basic. But it's a start?What if the center of lift approaches the CG point? Normally the center of lift remains behind the CG.. what is that result
as it gets closer?
The further you go the better.. until its too far however we normally fly in front of a Cub, with a big engine it's not balanced
even before flaps add to the equation.
Anyone know the math or what the result of moving the wing will bring?
Thank you!
The further you go the better.. until its too far however we normally fly in front of a Cub, with a big engine it's not balanced
even before flaps add to the equation...
Now that you brought up the big engine...
I thought your early performances at Valdez were awesome--
a lightweight Cub with a stroked 85 spanking the hotrods.
The Jerry Burr lightweight thing carried out to the nth degree.
I was kinda surprised (and I will admit, kinda disappointed) to see you show up later with a 320 bolted on.
Now you're talking about what sounds like a real major mod (moving the wing attach) to alter the CG,
due to the heavier Lycoming engine.
Have you considered just going back to the Continental?
Lighter & simpler is often (if not usually) better-
and that why originally I found your Little Cub so intriguing.
This kinda makes me think of the Cessna 180--
over the years it got heavier & heavier as they "improved" it,
but some of us still prefer the lighter early models.
Movable (forward extending) leading edges? Hell, dream big.
Isn't part of the reason for extending the SQ-12 and Rev 2 to re-gain elevator and trim authority to take advantage of the high lift/high AOA wing mods? Why is extending the tail aft a bad thing? It provides a good benefit-weight ratio. Judging by the SQ-12 videos and the pirep gross loads it carried it was well balanced. The Rev 3 wing may escalate things to another level, too. Interesting stuff.
The further you go the better.. until its too far however we normally fly in front of a Cub, with a big engine it's not balanced
even before flaps add to the equation.
Anyone know the math or what the result of moving the wing will bring? If we are moving the whole fuselage
back relative the forward moving center of lift it doesn't seem like it would take much to get to the sweet spot again.
Yes the wings movement will add to the forward CG but would think its a limited effect with a short arm.
What if the center of lift approaches the CG point? Normally the center of lift remains behind the CG.. what is that result
as it gets closer?
I know there are some engineers on board :lol:
Please PM if you don't like to broadcast.
fknapp_at_alarmspro (dot) com
Thank you!
Frank,
So, now that the event has been run, what did you build?
I do not even know if you had the new plane there. I see 33 combined this year, very nice.
Presuming you did have the new plane, how far did you move the wing to achieve the balance in the new plane?
Reduce the wing angle of incidence, and you reduce the pitching moment, resulting in a nose-up condition. At full forward CG, the stab should be slightly lower in it's slot, and the elevator deflected slightly up. When my wing was mounted at zero degrees incidence, (and washout correct) the pitch trim was halfway to the full nose-down position, and the elevator down at a noticeable angle. Other than the vicious spin (seven turns minimum recovery) that resulted from a stall, it still flew pretty good!
*only tried to kill me once.....
Fobjob The zero incidence was a contributor to the spin problems? Because of........? Thank you, for your post. Jonny O
A good reason to immediately stall/spin test any new airplane you acquire.....
They only let me “fly” it after I gave them a deposit, and then only with one of their guys in the back seat. I wonder if their pilots knew they would die if they stalled it at low altitude. By their 65mph wheel landing, I wondered how much skill they actually tried to acquire on that aircraft. I learned many years after that they wrecked it doing stall turns at just above the ground between the runways on a Sunday, (jackassing around) when the tower was not manned, then hauled it into a hanger and “repaired” it free of any FAA supervision.....In spite of all that, I was still glad that I had acquired a Cub, so all I had to do was stay alive until I figured out what was wrong and how to fix it......I would say before you acquire!