Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Flight Load Factors
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Commander-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 4:14 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Hi Guys,

  

 I need some help.

  

 I haven't got a copy of numerous Flight Manuals  for the Commander Models and will really appreciate your help.

  

 I understand that somewhere within these Manuals  are the "Flight Load Factors" for the Model.

  

 Could I ask that you take the proverbial "5  minutes" to look in your Manual and let me know the 'Positive G' and 'Negative  G' figures, together with the Model concerned.

  

 Your help will, of course, be very much  appreciated.

  

 Very Best Regards,

 Barry

    [quote][b]

swperk(at)earthlink.net
Guest

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 4:51 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

HI Barry,  

   

For the 681, it’s +3.34/-1.34 G.  

   

Regards,  

Stan  

       

From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry Collman

 Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 5:14 AM

 To: commander-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Flight Load Factors  

  

  

     

Hi Guys,  

    

   

    

I need some help.  

    

   

    

I haven't got a copy of numerous Flight Manuals for the Commander Models and will really appreciate your help.  

    

   

    

I understand that somewhere within these Manuals are the "Flight Load Factors" for the Model.  

    

   

    

Could I ask that you take the proverbial "5 minutes" to look in your Manual and let me know the 'Positive G' and 'Negative G' figures, together with the Model concerned.  

    

   

    

Your help will, of course, be very much appreciated.  

    

   

    

Very Best Regards,  

    

Barry  

   	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7 	  Quote: 	
		   	
8 	  Quote: 	
		   	
9

       [quote][b]

barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 5:18 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Hi Stan,

  

 My word - somebody's up early on a Saturday  morning!

  

 That's really great of you to answer so quickly  and I'm most grateful.

  

 Have a great weekend!

  

 Very Best Regards,

 Barry

 [quote]   ---

moe-rosspistons(at)hotmai
Guest

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 5:32 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Sir  Barry,

  

 680Fp Positive limit load factor is 3.43G's with no  negative given.

  

 Moe

  



  From: Barry Collman (barry.collman(at)air-britain.co.uk) 

 Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 5:14 AM

 To: commander-list(at)matronics.com (commander-list(at)matronics.com)  

 Subject: Flight Load Factors

 



 Hi Guys,

  

 I need some help.

  

 I haven't got a copy of numerous Flight Manuals  for the Commander Models and will really appreciate your help.

  

 I understand that somewhere within these Manuals  are the "Flight Load Factors" for the Model.

  

 Could I ask that you take the proverbial "5  minutes" to look in your Manual and let me know the 'Positive G' and 'Negative  G' figures, together with the Model concerned.

  

 Your help will, of course, be very much  appreciated.

  

 Very Best Regards,

 Barry

[quote]



href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com

href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c

[b]

barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 5:52 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Hi Moe,

  

 Another "West Coaster" up & about early on a  Saturday morning!

  

 Grateful thanks Moe.

  

 Very Best Regards,

 Barry

 [quote]   ---

moe-rosspistons(at)hotmai
Guest

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 6:34 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Hi Barry,

  

 Back in the 1970's a wise old man whom I idolized  told me that all of the money on the west coast was made between 6 and 10  AM.  Jokingly, I replied that I only wanted half of the money, so I would  see him about 8 AM.  Somewhere around the turn of the century the business  climate got so bad that 6AM was the break even time, and to squeeze a meager  profit you had to start at 5 AM.  Now retired, getting up at 5 really  makes sense, so I can "let the good times roll" earlier than  most.

  

 Three questions for you and/or our fellow  members:

  

 1.  Why does the rear door window on my plane  have a convex shape, while all other side windows are perfectly  flat?

 2.  Is anyone else going to Oshkosh in their  Commander?

 3.  Now that a full bag of 100LL for  a Commander is over $ 1,000.00 is anyone here in the southwest going over  to Mexico to purchase gas. Some of the local Gypsy Truckers are, to purchase  Diesel, and are saving about $500.00 per fill up.

  

 Best regards

 Moe

 N680RR

 680Fp

  

  

  

  



  From: Barry Collman (barry.collman(at)air-britain.co.uk) 

 Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 6:51 AM

 To: commander-list(at)matronics.com (commander-list(at)matronics.com)  

 Subject: Re: Flight Load Factors

 



 Hi Moe,

  

 Another "West Coaster" up & about early on a  Saturday morning!

  

 Grateful thanks Moe.

  

 Very Best Regards,

 Barry

 [quote]   ---

KORY

Joined: 03 May 2008
Posts: 1

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 6:48 am Post subject: Re: Flight Load Factors

FOR THE 685



FLAPS UP            POSITIVE 3.36     NEGATIVE 1.35

FLAPS DOWN       POSITIVE 2.00     NEGATIVE 0.00



KORY

barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 6:56 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Hi Moe,

  

 No wonder I can't afford a Commander - I don't  surface until 10am 

  

 I haven't got an answer why the rear door window  on your 680F(P) is different to the others.

  

 I know somebody who might know, so will get back  to you on that one.

  

 Best Regards,

 Barry

 [quote]   ---

barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 7:08 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Hi Kory,

  

 Grateful thanks!

  

 Which 685 is your one?

  

 Best Regards,

 Barry

  

 ---

blorber(at)southwestcirru
Guest

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 7:39 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Barry:



I've got a flight manual, without a signature page, entitled MR. RPM Aero Commander 680FL(P), FAA Approved 5 Jun, 1974.



FLIGHT LOAD FACTOR

The positive limit load factor is 3.40 G's.



NOTE

A minimum of 400 feet of altitude is required to recover from power off stalls with 8500 pounds at both forward and aft center of gravity.



Brock

--

barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 8:20 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Hi Brock,



Grateful thanks.



I have the figure 3.40 G's for the 'standard' 680FLP as well.



Your help is much appreciated.



Best Regards,

Barry



---

barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 12:35 pm Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Hi Moe,

  

 My Aero Commander Engineering 'guru' has just  replied to your question regarding the glass in your rear door  window.

 Here's what he has to say:

  

 "Here is  the only thing I can think of regarding a contoured window being found on a  Model 689F(P). As part of a later interior noise  reduction effort we slightly bulged the cabin windows to reduce the 'drum  head' effect resulting from the  windows being energized by outside  vibrations.

 This was done by placing the  plexiglass blank into a forming fixture, bringing it to forming temperature  and inflating it slightly with air pressure.

 The formed pane was then cooled while  still under pressure.

 This resulting outward bulge in the center  of the window panes would measure about 1/2 to 3/4 of an inch in height.

 [Of course the edges of the pane were  restrained in a flat plane to match the side of the fuselage which was flat  between Z -10.0 and 

 Z -28.0.]

 After the 680FP was out of production for  a prescribed period of time it is doubtful that the  Spares Department would have had the factory retain the 680FP  production window tooling since any future spares orders would have been very  few and far between.

 If a spares order was received for a 680FP cabin  door window it is possible that the order was filled by fabricating and forming  the glass on the existing 500S tooling.

 Since the 500S was unpressurized, the windows  were held in place with clips and there would have been no  peripheral screw hole pattern through the pane to contend  with.

 This would allow the existing hole pattern in the  680FP door to be transferred to the replacement glass.

 [It is likely that the 680FP windows would have  been formed from a stronger "stretched" type acrylic sheet material while the  500S windows would be formed from the standard "as cast" acrylic  sheet.]"

  

 Hopefully, that will be the reason.

 It will be interesting to learn whether any other  680F(P) owners have the same glass in their door window, or indeed, in any other  cabin windows.

  

 Very Best Regards,

 Barry



 [quote]   ---

RnJThompson(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 2:35 pm Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Hi Barry,  

   

My 680E manual states a positive limit load factor is 3.5 Gs.  

   

Cheers  

Richard  

   

--

dongirod

Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 140

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 6:06 pm Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Barry;

  

 I'm with you, I thought it was the eleventh  commandment, "Don't get up before the sun", besides, don't know what I  would do with half the money in the world.  Too many problems!   

  

 Also notice that Moe waited until retired, to tell  us how to make all that money.

  

 Don

 [quote]   ---

barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest

Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 2:44 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Hi Richard,

  

 Grateful thanks!

  

 Very Best Regards,

 Barry

 [quote]   ---

nico(at)cybersuperstore.c
Guest

Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 3:51 pm Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Wouldn't turbulence easily exceed the load when the flaps are down? +2 isn't

much and no negative?

 



--

BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 4:03 pm Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Good Evening Nico,

  

 Chances are that the airplane is actually much stronger than that, but 2 Gs  is all that they have to prove to the FEDs.  Same thing is true with the  other listed load factors. It has been a long time so somebody please correct me  where I am wrong, but I THINK the required structural strength on the tail is  only 1.5 Gs!

  

 Happy  Skies,



Old Bob

AKA

Bob Siegfried

Ancient Aviator

628 West  86th Street

Downers Grove, IL 60516

630 985-8502 

Stearman  N3977A

Brookeridge Air Park LL22

  

  In a message dated 5/4/2008 6:53:07 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  nico(at)cybersuperstore.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Wouldn't    turbulence easily exceed the load when the flaps are down? +2 isn't

much    and no negative?

	






Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food.

wjrhamilton(at)optusnet.c
Guest

Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 1:20 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Folks,  

The original certification of my 500A was in utility cat., limited aerobatics --- and we all know what Bob Hoover can do ---- but after the spare problems (necessitating the spar straps AD) it was revised to Normal cat.  

The design load factors were/are in Car 3/FAR 23. The 1.5 mentioned is FAR 25.  

All too many pilots forget the effect of “rolling G”, which greatly reduces the available load factor, by up to 30%, very significant for turbulence and turbulence penetration speeds.  

Cheers,   

Bill Hamilton  

       

From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of BobsV35B(at)aol.com

 Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 9:59 AM

 To: commander-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Re: Flight Load Factors  

  

  

     

Good Evening Nico,  

    

   

    

Chances are that the airplane is actually much stronger than that, but 2 Gs is all that they have to prove to the FEDs.  Same thing is true with the other listed load factors. It has been a long time so somebody please correct me where I am wrong, but I THINK the required structural strength on the tail is only 1.5 Gs!  

    

   

    

Happy Skies,

 

 Old Bob

 AKA

 Bob Siegfried

 Ancient Aviator

 628 West 86th Street

 Downers Grove, IL 60516

 630 985-8502 

 Stearman N3977A

 Brookeridge Air Park LL22    

   

      

In a message dated 5/4/2008 6:53:07 P.M. Central Daylight Time, nico(at)cybersuperstore.com writes:  

   	  Quote: 	
		    

Wouldn't turbulence easily exceed the load when the flaps are down? +2 isn't

 much and no negative?  	
  

  

  



 

         

  

Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food.  

   	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7 	  Quote: 	
		   	
8 	  Quote: 	
		   	
9

       [quote][b]

nico(at)cybersuperstore.c
Guest

Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 4:14 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Rolling G?

 Is that a kind of torque motion on the fuselage? Never  heard of it (which shouldn't be surprising).

 Nico

  



   From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com  [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill  Hamilton

Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 2:18 AM

To:  commander-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: RE: Re: Flight  Load Factors

 

  

Folks, 

The  original certification of my 500A was in utility cat., limited aerobatics ---  and we all know what Bob Hoover can do ---- but after the spare problems  (necessitating the spar straps AD) it was revised to Normal  cat. 

The  design load factors were/are in Car 3/FAR 23. The 1.5 mentioned is FAR  25. 

All  too many pilots forget the effect of “rolling G”, which greatly reduces the  available load factor, by up to 30%, very significant for turbulence and  turbulence penetration speeds. 

Cheers,   

Bill  Hamilton 

    

From:  owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com  [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of  BobsV35B(at)aol.com

Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 9:59 AM

To:  commander-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Re: Flight  Load Factors



 

   

Good  Evening Nico,

  

 

  

Chances  are that the airplane is actually much stronger than that, but 2 Gs is all that  they have to prove to the FEDs.  Same thing is true with the other listed  load factors. It has been a long time so somebody please correct me where I am  wrong, but I THINK the required structural strength on the tail is only 1.5  Gs!

  

 

  

Happy  Skies,



Old Bob

AKA

Bob Siegfried

Ancient Aviator

628 West  86th Street

Downers Grove, IL 60516

630 985-8502 

Stearman  N3977A

Brookeridge Air Park LL22  

 

   

In a  message dated 5/4/2008 6:53:07 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  nico(at)cybersuperstore.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		     

Wouldn't    turbulence easily exceed the load when the flaps are down? +2 isn't

much    and no negative? 	




 

    

 

Wondering  what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL  Food.

 	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7 	  Quote: 	
		   	
8 	  Quote: 	
		   	
9

 	  Quote: 	
		  	
0   [quote][b]

BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 4:48 am Post subject: Flight Load Factors

Good Morning Nico,

  

 That refers to the additional load applied to a wing when an aileron is  input. One wing gets a bigger load and the other wing gets less. That is why it  rolls. If the airplane is rolled while pulling any appreciable G load, the  additional load that is impressed by the application of aileron can easily  exceed the design limit which is only calculated for the straight ahead no roll  condition.

  

 I hear the big boys say:  Yank then bank. - Don't yank and  bank. Or:  Unload then yank!

  

 Happy  Skies,



Old Bob

AKA

Bob Siegfried

Ancient Aviator

628 West  86th Street

Downers Grove, IL 60516

630 985-8502 

Stearman  N3977A

Brookeridge Air Park LL22

  

  In a message dated 5/6/2008 7:16:09 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  nico(at)cybersuperstore.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		     Rolling G?

   Is that a kind of torque motion on the fuselage? Never    heard of it (which shouldn't be surprising).

   Nico

    

	






Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food.

  [quote][b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Commander-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum