Sidemounted engine

[Rcmaster199 at aol.com]

Jeff or Nat, to prove the point or disprove it, it might be worthwhile to run 
a simple experiment. Add, say, 6-8 ounces of lead to one wheel pant to cause 
an assymetric
 condition, and counter the out of balance condition with enough weight on 
the opposite wing tip. That much weight in the pant seems about right to 
simulate a skewed rather than orthogonal engine installation. Then  get to the rolls, 
fast slow and everything in between. It would be interesting to see what you 
get

Matt K

> Subj:Re: Sidemounted engine 
> Date:1/18/2004 2:23:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
> From:jhughes at hsonline.net
> Reply-to:discussion at nsrca.org
> To:discussion at nsrca.org
> Sent from the Internet 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, while I agree it's not worth worrying about. I do believe that it 
> wouldn't matter what orientation you mounted a single cylinder engine, there 
> would be some manuevers affected. But, axial rolls in particular wouldn't 
> matter.. Side, inverted, upright, from a mass distribution standpoint, the plane 
> couldn't tell. It would only be some wierd progression type manuever (tumbles, 
> etc).
>  
> 
> >> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: Nat Penton 
>> To: discussion at nsrca.org 
>> Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2004 8:57 AM
>> Subject: Re: Sidemounted engine
>> 
>> 
>> The forces causing a non-axial roll occur only during the acceleration 
>> phases of the roll ( starting and stopping ). Undesireable forces are generated 
>> because masses at different distances from the roll axis experience 
>> different rates of acceleration. In practice I don't think we have a problem with 
>> the side-mounted engine. Would someone tell me where to find the Mars 
>> pictures.        Voodoo
>> 
>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: Jeff Hughes 
>>> To: discussion at nsrca.org 
>>> Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2004 11:35 AM
>>> Subject: Re: Sidemounted engine
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Too really have the minimal, an electric motor and batteries on the Cg 
>>> running a driveshaft out to the nose would be the best solution. 
>>> 
>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>>> From: Chuck Wagoner 
>>>> To: discussion at nsrca.org 
>>>> Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2004 11:45 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Sidemounted engine
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Jeff,
>>>> What about a comparison of a "centered" electric vs. a twin?
>>>> Chuck
>>>> 
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>>> From: Jeff Hughes 
>>>> To: discussion at nsrca.org 
>>>> Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2004 11:36 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Sidemounted engine
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Though on a pattern plane, side mounted is just point of view. In knife 
>>>> edge an inverted engine is now side mounted. We're all going to have to go 
>>>> to twins to solve this issue!
>>>> 
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>>> From: Nat Penton 
>>>> To: discussion at nsrca.org 
>>>> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2004 6:01 PM
>>>> Subject: Sidemounted engine
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Looking at the undesirable forces that would be generated by the 
>>>> assymetric distribution of weight to achieve lateral balance - hard yaw or tight 
>>>> corners would produce no effect because all components would be subject to 
>>>> the same acceleration. There would be an effect during roll, however, 
>>>> because the masses are subjected to different rates of acceleration (polar ) . 
>>>> Our planes damp and reach steady state roll rapidly . These unwanted roll 
>>>> forces would cause a change in pitch ( same as when one aileron has more 
>>>> throw ) during their short life . The magnitude of the pitch change would 
>>>> be hard to quantify ( by me 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20040118/61462021/attachment.html