A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Bad timing...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old March 12th 07, 05:56 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning
Peter Dohm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,754
Default Bad timing...

Yes its hydraulic (Single Cylinder)... so yes, it could definitely
still fail.

The whole system is much simpler (And lighter, by about 8 lbs) than
the toe-brake system though, and according to my mechanic at least,
its basically bullet-proof...

This is simply according to him - but apparently fried right wheels/
brakes are a reasonably common (especially on Grummans and training
aircraft)... he attributes it simply to the subconscious dragging on
takeoff/taxi... At the very least, the right pads wear faster than the
left on most planes he looks at, even with experienced pilots.

The only planes he doesn't see it on are the few that don't have toe
brakes. That was enough for me... (Disclaimer, I am a young, low-time
pilot with ABSOLUTELY no experience in this matter, other than I
learned in a few toe-brake planes before I bought 61J, and I adapted
to no toe-brakes in about 5 minutes...)

I do tend to trust the opinion of a mechanic who tells me not to give
him money for things though...

-Scott


Thanks.

Eight pounds is quite a weight saving, especially since Pipers have very
positive nose wheel steering, so the toe brakes provide only dedundancy. My
personal prejudice favors the greatest theoretical redundancy, meaning nose
wheel steering plus toe brakes, but I don't have the experience either--so
it is just opinion, and worth slightly less than you paid for it.

BTW, the Gruman Cheetah and Tiger models, and many of the newer training
aircraft, have castoring nosewheels--so steering is accomplished by
differential braking until the rudder becomes effective. That should cause
them to have faster right side brake wear than Cessna trainers, which have
spring steering which allows the nose wheel to lock straight ahead in flight
and which can become a little problematic; especially if the nose strut and
the springs are not maintained.

Peter


Ads
  #32  
Old March 12th 07, 10:30 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning
EridanMan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 208
Default Bad timing...

Eight pounds is quite a weight saving, especially since Pipers have very
positive nose wheel steering, so the toe brakes provide only redundancy. My
personal prejudice favors the greatest theoretical redundancy, meaning nose
wheel steering plus toe brakes


Yes, but then you also might argue that toe brakes (requiring two
cylinders, two pressurized lines, etc) have twice as many failure
points for the same mission-critical system (Braking)... so while you
get redundant steering, you get it at the cost of more mission
critical parts to fail

I'm stirring the pot of course, I would gladly step up to a newer
aircraft with toe brakes if given the opportunity, I'm just saying I
don't miss them on my current bird

For me the 2k labor + 8lbs was the primary deciding factor (funny how
that works)

BTW, the Gruman Cheetah and Tiger models, and many of the newer training
aircraft, have castoring nosewheels--so steering is accomplished by
differential braking until the rudder becomes effective.


I've flown a friends cheetah... Going from my direct-drive, simple
rudder pedal steering too a toe-brake-only system was... interesting,
to say the least.

My biggest issue in that plane however was it was simply too small for
me... I could not get into a position where I could manipulate the
pedals comfortably... (same with most toe-brake equipped planes (I'm
6'4, 240), but the grumman was particularly bad)

Shame, because otherwise I love the grummans... great view and fun to
fly.

That should cause them to have faster right side brake wear than Cessna trainers, which
have spring steering which allows the nose wheel to lock straight ahead in flight.


I think the issue Any training airplane has is simply... trainees...
even aircraft Pipers and Cessnas... it takes a few flights to get in
the hang of keeping your foot off the brakes and on the rudder at
takeoff... for some (like me) its rather uncomfortable even

and which can become a little problematic; especially if the nose strut and
the springs are not maintained.


I read somewhere that Cessna Milked that patent for all it was worth
and despite the MX issues, I think its a smarter system... I still
live in fear (especially when fighting particularly gusty x-winds) of
touching down sooner than I anticipate with a nice heavily cocked
front nose wheel and hearing the control line go *SNAP*...

Peter



  #33  
Old March 13th 07, 12:17 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning
Drew Dalgleish
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 143
Default Bad timing...

On 12 Mar 2007 15:30:12 -0700, "EridanMan"
wrote:

Eight pounds is quite a weight saving, especially since Pipers have very
positive nose wheel steering, so the toe brakes provide only redundancy. My
personal prejudice favors the greatest theoretical redundancy, meaning nose
wheel steering plus toe brakes


Yes, but then you also might argue that toe brakes (requiring two
cylinders, two pressurized lines, etc) have twice as many failure
points for the same mission-critical system (Braking)... so while you
get redundant steering, you get it at the cost of more mission
critical parts to fail

I'm stirring the pot of course, I would gladly step up to a newer
aircraft with toe brakes if given the opportunity, I'm just saying I
don't miss them on my current bird


Peter


NA stirring the pot would be to suggest that with the training wheel
on the front, long wide paved runways having one wheel brake is way
more than whats needed for safe operation.

  #34  
Old March 13th 07, 03:46 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning
Peter Dohm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,754
Default Bad timing...

Eight pounds is quite a weight saving, especially since Pipers have very
positive nose wheel steering, so the toe brakes provide only redundancy.

My
personal prejudice favors the greatest theoretical redundancy, meaning

nose
wheel steering plus toe brakes


Yes, but then you also might argue that toe brakes (requiring two
cylinders, two pressurized lines, etc) have twice as many failure
points for the same mission-critical system (Braking)... so while you
get redundant steering, you get it at the cost of more mission
critical parts to fail

I'm stirring the pot of course, I would gladly step up to a newer
aircraft with toe brakes if given the opportunity, I'm just saying I
don't miss them on my current bird

For me the 2k labor + 8lbs was the primary deciding factor (funny how
that works)

This is a common topic of hangar flying sessions, and I am not really a
strong advocate either way. I only have a preference, if faced with two
otherwise equal airplanes at essentially the same price.

BTW, the Gruman Cheetah and Tiger models, and many of the newer training
aircraft, have castoring nosewheels--so steering is accomplished by
differential braking until the rudder becomes effective.


I've flown a friends cheetah... Going from my direct-drive, simple
rudder pedal steering too a toe-brake-only system was... interesting,
to say the least.

I can't argue with you there, although the only plane with toe-brake only
steering that I ever had occasion to taxi was an an Aero Commender.
Interestingly, the rudder was reasonably effective at a much lower speed
than I would have supposed. (I no longer recall the speed--or the wind
conditions)

Actually, the size of the rudder and its relationship to the vertical
stabilizer plays a major role in the need for toe brakes, nosewheel
steering, or even tailwheel steering. I have read that the Supermarine
Spitfire had no tail wheel lock and also no tailwheel steering--and I am
confident that some here will correct me if I am mistaken.

My biggest issue in that plane however was it was simply too small for
me... I could not get into a position where I could manipulate the
pedals comfortably... (same with most toe-brake equipped planes (I'm
6'4, 240), but the grumman was particularly bad)

Shame, because otherwise I love the grummans... great view and fun to
fly.

I've never gotten to try one on, but should find it a little easier. I'm a
little guy by comparison--6'1", 200#--and intending to lose 20#.

That should cause them to have faster right side brake wear than Cessna

trainers, which
have spring steering which allows the nose wheel to lock straight ahead

in flight.

I think the issue Any training airplane has is simply... trainees...
even aircraft Pipers and Cessnas... it takes a few flights to get in
the hang of keeping your foot off the brakes and on the rudder at
takeoff... for some (like me) its rather uncomfortable even

No argument there. In my case, it was simply a matter of putting my feet as
low a practical on the pedals. However, in the case of something like the
Gruman it would be a little more complicated, a lot would depend on whether
there was sufficient rudder authority just from the prop blast--if not, it
should be a matter of keeping my toes off of the left brake on the take off
roll.

and which can become a little problematic; especially if the nose strut

and
the springs are not maintained.


I read somewhere that Cessna Milked that patent for all it was worth
and despite the MX issues, I think its a smarter system... I still
live in fear (especially when fighting particularly gusty x-winds) of
touching down sooner than I anticipate with a nice heavily cocked
front nose wheel and hearing the control line go *SNAP*...

I flew Tomahawks in crosswinds while I was still plenty ham fisted (or is
that ham footed) and that was never a problem. The airplane's response was
so non-memorable that I have no recollection of it.

I suppose I should add that I was taught to hold the nose off untill a good
bit of speed was lost, rather than actively derotating. Actually, in the
worst case, I doubt that a nosewheel still cocked would do more than make me
appear clumsy--unless it was combined with a worse error.

Peter


  #35  
Old March 13th 07, 05:59 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning
Tri-Pacer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 120
Default Bad timing...


In the TriPacer, a cable goes from the hand brake, around a few pulleys,
and ultimately it ends up under the pilot's seat. Under the pilot's seat
(and I'm not joking) you will find a Piper Cub heel brake, with a hole
in the back of the heel brake, where the cable connects.

The heel brake is hydraulic and applies both wheel brakes
simultaneously. The diaphragm has a habit of splitting just when you
really need the brakes, leaving you with nothing!

--


Unless you put in an STC'd booster from Steve's Aircraft Then you really
have brakes whenever you really need them. :-)

Cheers:

Paul
N1431A


  #36  
Old March 13th 07, 06:16 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning
EridanMan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 208
Default Bad timing...

NA stirring the pot would be to suggest that with the training wheel
on the front, long wide paved runways having one wheel brake is way
more than whats needed for safe operation.


I suddenly got an amusing mental image of an aircraft doing pirouettes
in the run-up area while the flight crew non-nonchalantly went through
their checks...



  #37  
Old March 13th 07, 08:19 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning
Peter Dohm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,754
Default Bad timing...

NA stirring the pot would be to suggest that with the training wheel
on the front, long wide paved runways having one wheel brake is way
more than whats needed for safe operation.


I suddenly got an amusing mental image of an aircraft doing pirouettes
in the run-up area while the flight crew non-nonchalantly went through
their checks...



LOL :-)


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bad timing... Jay Honeck Piloting 39 March 13th 07 08:19 PM
timing holds [email protected] Instrument Flight Rules 16 February 17th 05 12:18 AM
Approach Timing john smith Instrument Flight Rules 36 September 9th 04 03:37 PM
Timing light for electronic ignition Ron Home Built 4 August 20th 04 05:18 PM
Timing on Subaru EJ22 ??? Randy Rotorcraft 1 November 9th 03 06:15 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.