Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=67.15.10.31; envelope-from=bob@bob-white.com
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:41:36 -0700
From: Bob White <bob@bob-white.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Engine mounts
Message-Id: <20050116114136.6a344609.bob@bob-white.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-609246@logan.com>
References: <list-609246@logan.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


That's correct.  It's not too hard to engineer an attachment for a 50 lb
load.  Even with a 6 g landing or whatever it's only 300 lbs., easily
handled by a 1/2 inch steel rod.  As I recall the load limit on the
neoprene rod ends is about 300 lbs.  If the static load is much higher
than 50 lbs, I will use something else.

Bob White

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 10:08:33 -0800 (PST)
Tom <tomtugan@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Bob,
> Of course you meant the rear mount supports 50lbs in a 1G environment
> and without additional p-factor forces you might get when slipping(I
> think) or when pitching the aircraft and the rear support would be
> involved in pitching the motor-drive-and-prop(the faster the more). 
> Tom
> 
> --- Bob White <bob@bob-white.com> wrote:
> > 
> > The weight on the rear mount has been estimated to be on the order
> > of 50 lbs.  I'm not sure I believe this number especially since I
> > have the MM plate instead of the S-beam.  One of the things on my
> > todo list is to measure the weight after I get a prop installed.
> > Bob White
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> __________________________________ 
> Do you Yahoo!? 
> Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
> http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
> 
> >>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
> 
> 


-- 
http://www.bob-white.com
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 (soon)