I say torsional twist on spar/D-cell could be a problem. But i standto be corrected upon flight testing.
JPXman Posted on Jun 8 2005, 01:28 AM
on a standard nacelle with the rubber mounts in two rows, along top and bottom, as long as the centreline of the thrust acts somewhere between the two, I would think this would be satisfactory as well. this would only induce a tiny moment on the D-cell due to thrust if it was between the top and bottom mounts.
last year it was ok ?
JPXman Posted on Mar 9 2004, 12:02 PM
it seems to me that people have been flying on redrive 185's with 44" props for 20 years in British Columbia. The fact that the thrust centreline is actually lower will help reduce pitch/thrust sensitivity in my mind.
of course, simply my opinion! I think they look sweet and will work fine - we're not flying the space shuttle here with ultra-fine tolerances.
I would however hope that Carel incorporated the "long bolt" modification to his engine mounting strategy, and incorporated a method of distributing the new longitudinal torque about the D-cell from the hefty amount of additional off-centre thrust - could be in the form of the extra plate on the top and bottom that is added as part of the long bolt mod. But if his craftsmanship is any indication, i think its all great.
I say giver Carel.
Tyler
