In a message dated 8/24/2007 4:09:58 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,=20 WRJJRS@aol.com writes:

<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>

Bill or anyone,

I guess I need to change my q= uestion=20 to more specifics. For example, what do you think of the single point=20 attachment on the rear of the s-beam verses the more substantial attachm= ent=20 of the flat plate mount. I personally don't know if I feel comfortable w= ith=20 a single point of attachment in the rear. For example, there may be= =20 times when the engine gets torqued around due to sudden changes of fligh= t=20 direction.

Robert

I can assure you that when stressed the 4 studs will crack out the= =20 front cover. It has very few attachment bolts to the front iron, and is not=20= very=20 well thought out as a mount for both engine weight, part of the trans weight= ,=20 and torsion control. It is fine for mild street use and that's about it.

For aviation use, it would not be stressed as much as it is in the car=20= in=20 the bending mode. The beam or whatever would take out the torsional load and= I=20 think all would be well if you start with a cover that had not been abused,=20= or=20 is already cracking.

The blade loss that generates the most catastrophic outcome would be fr= om a=20 forged aluminum blade, because of its weight. Another vote for carbon fiber=20 blades. I read one story about a blade loss in a Mooney that ended happ= ily=20 in a corn field.

The engine was contained only by cables, wiring and the cowling latches= =20 remaining closed. None of the engine mounting attach points remained intact.= =20 That is a bunch of luck burned up at one time.

A more likely outcome would be that the whole assembly firewall forward= =20 will exit the aircraft in a small part of one second. The departing material= and=20 remaining blades will comprehensively damage the remaining airframe.=20 Damaged or not the loss of that 500 pounds will result in a pitch up that wi= ll=20 fail the spar and render occupants unconscious. So planning on 1/2 of a seco= nd=20 from one mount style or 1/4 of a second from another style is of little valu= e.=20 The odds against this happening to you are one in a billion. But Murphy says= =20 probably on the first test flight. So add a cable along one top mount t= ube=20 and another along one bottom mount tube, and use the mounting system th= at=20 makes you feel good. As long as the cables are installed, they will not be=20 needed.

Lynn E. Hanover

Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.

-------------------------------1187962907--