--


g-rating

by (no login)

 
Gee, or shall I say, "g"ratings should be considered carefully on plans-built aircraft.

I remember the numbers as +6/-4 BUT every Teenie Two should be considered as hand built and just because it looks nice does not mean that the airframe is good enough to meet these numbers. And that should be lowered further if your Teenie has been damaged previously... which I believe yours was.

I also remember a fellow named Bob Dixon from South Carolina, then later Colorado I think, who was an engineer and worked out the numbers as only about HALF that as designed. He actually added chrome moly steel plates on the ends of his spars at the connection points to beef it up to the posted number.

The other consideration is if the airplane is overweight because those numbers were figured on an airframe that was figured empty at 310 lbs.

So I'm just saying that you should be careful to rely on those figures. You may want to ease into the flight regime with your airplane and do a full test program, but a better thing to do is actually test that wing with weight like they used to require for certification. I've never seen any pictures of the Parker wing actually tested so I bet that it was never done. This should also cause you to be suspect of the strength of the wing.

Regards,

Ken






Posted on Feb 22, 2008, 12:59 PM
from IP address 63.131.48.35


Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home
Responses

  1. Thanks. Nine-0-Nine, Feb 22, 2008, 1:36 PM
    1. sweet.... , Feb 23, 2008, 8:53 AM
      1. Thanks. , Feb 23, 2008, 11:21 AM

Find more forums on Homebuilt AircraftCreate your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2008 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement