Date
1 - 10 of 10
Toe
|
dfwsfug <dfwsfug@...>
We have not taxi tested yet or flown.Wondered about the weight verses
empty on the toe of the mains. If we set for neutral toe empty. That will give us some positive toe (toe-out) under load at increasing rate up to gross which also gives us a higher landing/rollout speed when extra directional help needed.The camber of 11-13 " was mentioned how is that measured? We can use the Gall-string method for toe but what for camber? We have a direct rod link rudder to solid tailwheel.Ratio 1:1 no springs. Considering taking the advice to build another fork using pneumatic tire and change the Rudder to Tailwheel ratio 4:1 for initial self checkout period.Can bolt either on. CE in Southern Saskatchewan |
|
|
|
David J. Gall
CE:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I'm not so sure that 4:1 is advisable. There are a LOT of other factors that I did not mention that must be considered when choosing a rudder/tailwheel ratio. Four-to-one might seem best for the ONE consideration that I listed, but even that has mitigating factors to consider. I did not address the issue of control power at all; that factor alone will significantly affect the preferred ratio. What if the tailwheel's control power is only 1/4 that of the rudder - then the preferred ratio would be back up to 1:1. Neil's is the first report that I've seen of a tailwheel that might be too effective. I would not recommend that you do any design changes based on his report and my comment alone. He has a non-standard tailwheel setup that just might be the only one like it in the world. Like they say on the mileage sticker on cars: "Your results may vary." The 11-13" camber measurement is done during new construction. If you have already built your plane, it is sufficient to measure the camber at gross weight and verify that it is neutral or slightly positive. I'm not sure that the toe changes as much as you seem to indicate. Good luck, David J. Gall P.S. Did I say to use string...? http://david.gall.com/files/Airplane/quickie1.txt -----Original Message-----
From: dfwsfug [mailto:dfwsfug@...] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:32 PM To: Q-LIST@... Subject: [Q-LIST] Toe We have not taxi tested yet or flown.Wondered about the weight verses empty on the toe of the mains. If we set for neutral toe empty. That will give us some positive toe (toe-out) under load at increasing rate up to gross which also gives us a higher landing/rollout speed when extra directional help needed.The camber of 11-13 " was mentioned how is that measured? We can use the Gall-string method for toe but what for camber? We have a direct rod link rudder to solid tailwheel.Ratio 1:1 no springs. Considering taking the advice to build another fork using pneumatic tire and change the Rudder to Tailwheel ratio 4:1 for initial self checkout period.Can bolt either on. CE in Southern Saskatchewan To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: Q-LIST-unsubscribe@... Quickie Builders Association WEB site http://www.quickiebuilders.org Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. |
|
|
|
dfwsfug <dfwsfug@...>
David,
If I understand tailwheel power correctly it is in the leveraging as opposed to arc which would be problematic on narrow sharp turn taxiways.However assisting straight line takeoff and landing runs at the expense of manuevering. I welcome your reminder to prudently stick to plans making the 4:1 ratio concept for discussion only item.It maybe in the feet agressive while under rudder control and gingerly while under tailwheel control after the wing stops lifting. Bringing new meaning to the term "two step." An undiscovered frontier for us at this point.With outrigger gear I wonder if that amplifies minute toe variations as it does differential braking action.Fishing line a better choice. Thanks and Season's Greetings CE in SS --- In Q-LIST@y..., "David J. Gall" <David@G...> wrote: CE:factors that I did not mention that must be considered when choosing arudder/tailwheel ratio. Four-to-one might seem best for the ONE consideration that Ilisted, but even that has mitigating factors to consider. I did not addressthe issue of control power at all; that factor alone will significantlyaffect the preferred ratio. What if the tailwheel's control power is only1/4 that of the rudder - then the preferred ratio would be back up to 1:1.be too effective. I would not recommend that you do any design changesbased on his report and my comment alone. He has a non-standard tailwheel setupthat just might be the only one like it in the world. Like they say on themileage sticker on cars: "Your results may vary."you have already built your plane, it is sufficient to measure the camber atgross weight and verify that it is neutral or slightly positive.verses empty on the toe of the mains. If we set for neutral toe empty. Thatfor toe but what for camber? We have a direct rod link rudder to solid |
|
|
|
Bob Farnam <bfarnam@...>
There is a practical aspect to this discussion. If you use a full-swiveling tail
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
wheel, then you don't need as much travel on the tailwheel belcrank to be able to maneuver tightly on the ramp. However, full-swiveling tailwheels generally have a release cam set to go into full swivel mode at somewhere around 20 or so degrees depending upon the make. You want to set the ratios to make the tailwheel as docile as possible at high runway speed, but still be able to reach the cam position with full rudder input. That is what Jim Patillo and I have done. Our airplanes are easy to steer at high speed and can still pivot around a main wheel when we want. Bob F Q200 350 hours "David J. Gall" wrote: CE: |
|
|
|
Mark Wismer <mwismer@...>
Bob and Jim,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Is the mod you have done for your tailwheel documneted online somewhere? I looked at the tailwheel picture that Jim has posted to his group files, but I don't understand where it releases and becomes 'full swivel'. The picture looks like a solid connection between cables and tailwheel. Do you both have the same ratio between tailwheel angle and rudder deflection angle? What is it? Thanks, Mark Wismer Q2 in progress Bob Farnam wrote:
|
|
|
|
Jim Patillo <patillo@...>
Mark,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I don't believe anything is documented on line regarding this mod other than my pictures. The tail wheel releases as soon as it passes 25 degrees either side of center. It will then will swivel 360 degrees until the tailwheel bell crank is moved back past 25 degrees towards center? Once the bell crank passes 25 degrees the wheel "locks" in place again. This allows a pivot on the main. The manufacturer is Aviation Products in Ojai, Ca. Does this make sense? Jim Patillo ----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Wismer" <mwismer@...> To: <Q-LIST@...> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 9:54 AM Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Toe Bob and Jim,around a main wheel when we want. |
|
|
|
dfwsfug <dfwsfug@...>
Jim,
What size wheel are you using and weight(model) from AP Ojai, Ca. worked best for your Q? We have been following this discussion with keen interest.Your explaination makes very good sense. Have flown C- 120 to 180 and full swivel is the only way to go IMHO. Here's the URL link to supplier.Which model? CE in Southern Saskatchewan http://musclebiplane.org/htmlfile/tailwhls.shtml --- In Q-LIST@y..., "Jim Patillo" <patillo@a...> wrote: Mark,other than my pictures.of center. It will then will swivel 360 degrees until the tailwheelbell crank is moved back past 25 degrees towards center? Once the bell crankpasses 25 degrees the wheel "locks" in place again. This allows a pivot onthe main. The manufacturer is Aviation Products in Ojai, Ca. Does this makesense? Jim Patilloto his becomes 'fullgroup files, but I don't understand where it releases and cables andswivel'. The picture looks like a solid connection between angle andtailwheel. Do you both have the same ratio between tailwheel still pivotrudder deflection angle? What is it? around ahttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/main wheel when we want. |
|
|
|
Jim Patillo <patillo@...>
We use a 6" tailwheel assembly. They either come with 10 or 20 degrees angle
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
and slide onto a 5/8" rod quite nicely. This specific "angle" helps you get the proper lift and pivot on the tail which affects the AOA of canard on the ground. Jim Patillo ----- Original Message -----
From: "dfwsfug" <dfwsfug@...> To: <Q-LIST@...> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 9:08 PM Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Toe Jim, |
|
|
|
Bob Farnam <bfarnam@...>
Jim and I are both using the 6" solid tailwheel from Aviation Products in
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Ojai, CA. Phone 805-646-6042. They have a variety of mount types and angles for attaching to the tailspring. 350 hours has worn my tailwheel down to about 5" + diameter, with no noticeable change in handling. BobF. N200QK dfwsfug wrote: Jim, |
|
|
|
James Postma <james@...>
FYI my current rudder is a perfect balance for the stock tailwheel. You may
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
estimate the optimum ratio by comparing the size and effectiveness of the modified to the stock by looking at pictures of the before and and after rudder at www.postma.com James Postma Q2 Revmaster N145EX Steilacoom, Washington (253) 584-1182 9:00 to 8:00 PDT ----- Original Message -----
From: "dfwsfug" <dfwsfug@...> To: <Q-LIST@...> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:55 PM Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Toe David, |
|
|