Shaun Simpkins wrote:
> After looking at the Berubeand HB-YIB conventional gear photos again,
> and comparing them to other installations, I'm not convinced that this
> installation is as robust as the monowheel or trigear. The gear is
> apparently placed under the seat pan. The monowheel ties in to the
> engine mount, and loads are transmitted through the firewall and
> tunnel to the rest of the fuselage. The trigear mains appear to tie
> in to the main spar.
>
No - it's bonded into the baggage bay - nowhere near the spar.
> If we consider the Van's RV gear arrangement, the mains angle back
> from the engine mount, making for a light and efficient structure.
> This arrangement would take advantage of the structure already in
> place for the monowheel, but the engine mount and footwells probably
> prevent this.
the RV has widely spaced engine mount elements - the Europa does not. I
looked at RV-type gear attached to the engine mount, but torsional loads
(from a one wheel landing) looked too high, and the legs themselves
would have to be about 43" long - and either too flexible, or very heavy
(requiring more structure, more weight, etc)
Also looked at BB's type arrangement - and although it will probably
work OK, it's difficult to do as a retrofit, and probably wouldn't pass
certified standards.
My conversion (using trigear mainlegs) is similar to the std trigear
mounting scheme (but incorporating Y bulkheads rather than X bulkheads)
and the numbers stack up OK - the only disadvantage is that it places
structure under the pilot's knees - not actually in the way, but a bit
odd...
Miles
|