Steve Pierce
BENEFACTOR
Graham, TX
Busy sending airplanes off, receiving others and trying to get one out the door today. Search model CC19 in this search engine and you will find the data. http://aviationdb.net/aviationdb/AccidentQuery#SUBMIT
Busy sending airplanes off, receiving others and trying to get one out the door today. Search model CC19 in this search engine and you will find the data. http://aviationdb.net/aviationdb/AccidentQuery#SUBMIT
What type of landing gear does not collapse when stressed beyond normal operating limits? It is normal to expect a failure of anything when stressed beyond normal operating limits.Legacy gear cub tend to totally collapse when stressed beyond normal operating limits.
What type of landing gear does not collapse when stressed beyond normal operating limits? It is normal to expect a failure of anything when stressed beyond normal operating limits.
My daughter did a school presentation on conformational bias. Conclusions drawn, search facts that support conclusion.
Legacy Cub gear has been around since 1937, with how many units delivered? I am not a statistician, but my guess is the sample size of XCub aircraft is not sufficient to draw any significant conclusions. I think we should revisit this in say, 85 years or so....
No one will sell me on the NTSB data, it does not tell the real story like accident reports and full investigations do.
Asked and answered repeatedly in this thread. Of course everything will break at some point but we are talking about catastrophic failure versus limited failure. FAIL SAFE FAILURE.
So far with the XCub experience, ground loop induced partial gear collapse would appear to save the cost of replacing a $12,500 composite prop and an engine tear down.
So back to my point and the subject of the this thread. If you have a legacy cub gear system there are two paths to a better landing gear system that is more robust. Sell your airplane and buy a $500k XCub. Or covert your legacy cub gear to a stronger gear, more likely to "fail safe" than totally fail.
One Hartzell Trailblazer composite prop costs $12,500 (found on every FX-3 and XCub). Totally converting a legacy cub gear system to the Beringer ALG costs $10,600. Do the math. So far it looks the odds of a destructive ground loop that in NTSB reportable (we know there are more) is around 12% in the FX-3 and XCub fleet. Overtime that number will grow as fleet time rises.
Just postulation/stirring the pot. I'd like to see what the real thoughts are behind the idea that Beringer's ALG would not collapse in a sideload where stock gear would fail. So far it has only been shown that stock -18 landing gear would fail but there has been no evidence to show that Beringer gear would NOT fail under the same circumstances.
Good questions. There just are not enough Beringer ALG in the cub community to draw any conclusions. I have never seen a cub with Beringer ALG after a ground loop. I am trying to avoid that data point if I can.
As to side loading failure, until last year the Beringer ALG system for the cub included two extra struts from the V cabane back to the aft gear attach. This was obviously done to stabilize the V cabane during side loading. These struts have now been deleted by Beringer in currently shipping gear sets. I talked to an engineer at Beringer about this change. He said during the process of obtaining the STC for the SuperCub it was determined that this strut was structurally not necessary. They did leave the very beefy V cabane doubler.
Here is an image of the aft V cabane struts:
i like the velcro brake line holder, who makes them like that?
Dang, that is one clean plane in the pic. Guess I better get to work on cleaning mine.