|
Mr. Buzzman:
Can you use the ribs from a dacron sail application on a Challenger II full wing and
convert to STITS covering? My plane is sail covered with insertable ribs that rivet to the
trailing edge. Can I utilize these same ribs when converting to STITS or Polyfiber
covering the wing?
A: Yes you can use the ribs. Are there any additional support systems internal to
the wing that must be used when utilizing STITS covering that are not used in a sail
application?
A: Yes the number of ribs doubles when you use the stits process and the attachment
mechanism is different. You would be wise to contact Dave Goulet in the US or Iain
Corstine in Canada for more information.
Also: Do you know of a quick fix for changing the throttle linkage on both the Challenger
I and II when moving the Rotax upright on top of the root tube? The existing throttle
cables are not long enough when the engine is top mounted.
A: You can usually move enough guides to allow the cables to reach for an upright mount
- for more information on the upright mount check out www.ultralightnews.com -
Troubleshooting the Challenger.
I have seen applications where there is a cable splice at the throttle handle end, but
this causes some abrasion problems. I have seen a cable splitter mounted on the engine
which accepts the original single throttle cable and utilizes two splitter cables to
operate the carb slide. However, in this application, the slides do not travel their
entire distance. You either have to have a fast idle or sacrifice full power (wide open
slide). Any suggestions would be helpful.
A:The system used on the stock Challenger is "Mickey Mouse" for a smooth
system switch to the Rans throttle control used in the S-7 Courier - it is available from
LEAF, CPS, or Light Engine Specialties.
Another problem I have discovered is that my throttle handle will not keep the position to
which I set it. It always wants to close. If I tighten the nut and bolt holding it to the
mount, it will maintain position for a while but as I work the throttle, it loosens and I
am back to my original problem.
A:That is one of the problems associated with using the system supplied by Quad City -
I do not know of a fix for it other than changing the system.
Where do I send my $1.00?
Ultralight News Covering the World of Ultralight Aviation
Karl G. Fields - karl.fields@alliedsignal.com
I have some questions that I would appreciate answers to if
possible. I bought an ultralight with a tube frame and a vee tail. I am not sure what kind
of aircraft it is. I was told it is a Hummer. It has guy wires above and below main wing.
it is pretty old, possibly late 70s. If that sounds right, where can I get information on
it as I need wing ribs and wing and control surfaces replaced.
A: The Hummer was the forerunner to the Drifter manufactured
by Maxair. It has a V tail, and the pilot sits out in front on a main boom. While parts
are going to be hard to find for it a company that can probably help you is Lockwood
Aviation in Sebring Florida - you can get their phone number and address from the single
and two place buyers guides on my site at www.ultralightnews.com. They now produce the
Drifter line and many of the parts will be common, and Phil Lockwood might have more
information on the craft. I also have a brand new Rotax single cylinder engine that
was never started and was told that it was the engine designed for that plane. However, it
now has no plug, carb, or exhaust. Can you help me in this regard, I.E. size, h.p., oil
pre-mix, or any other information.
A: The 277 Rotax puts out 28 hp, the oil mixture is 50 to 1,
the carb used is a Bing 54, the spark plug is a NGK B8 ES, the exhaust used was a side
mount.
Larry lduskey@eohio.net
Dear Sir
I own an Australian built Airborne Edge Microlight aircraft which
I purchased new in September 1996. It came fitted with a standard 3-blade ground
adjustable Ivoprop mated to a Rotax 503 engine with a 2.62:1 E-type gearbox. The current
setup is such that the rate of climb is quite poor, noise levels are higher than I like
and engine revs have to be kept quite high to maintain height. For example, max revs are
6400 which is needed for take-off and climb while 5400 revs are required to maintain
height when flying solo and 5800 when taking a passenger.
A: These RPM's are generally the ones used for climb and
cruise for most ultralights, and are the leanest settings for cruise economy.
It has been suggested to me that fitting a different gearbox
ratio (such as 3.47:1 or 4.0:1) could be beneficial in reducing engine revs, increasing
climb and lowering noise levels. Maybe you've had experience with an engine, gearbox and
prop setup such as one of the above and could advise me of the best arrangement and any
benefits or problems.
A:By changing your gear box ratio from 2.62:1 to 4.0:1 you
will definitely notice a decrease in noise - but your 62 inch, 3 blade prop will not work
with this combination - to take advantage of the slower spinning prop you will have to
spin a 3 blade 68 / 72 inch prop.
My experience has been when using the longer props that they are
quieter and the climb rate is a LITTLE better but cruise speed suffers. In most cases your
craft would be equipped with a 582 engine if it was being used in a two place
configuration. You just don't have enough horsepower to fly with two people on board
without using the higher rpms - which gives you the horsepower necessary to fly with two
people.
In a single place configuration in a 4 to 1 reduction ratio you
should be able to cruise with the proper prop in around 4800 rpm. The cost of a new prop
and new gears might make this economically unreasonable.
Also, you may know of some other contact/s who could offer me
some advise. Regards, Paul Coffey
Congratulations for your home page, it has been very useful with
all your advises I thank you very much.
I;m a challenger II, two seats owner ,I have my plane in
Tequesquitengo Lake in these place flie around 50 ultraligts, I like de perfomance in my
plane and it has all the improvements like 60'' prop , 503 engine,Mylar wing sails, struts
and wheel covers, front suspension, (made by my) electric start(because I like to soar
without engine) whit 14.5 amps battery etc.
in these place are 6 more challengers bot none have 60'' prop and
struts and mine relay fly faster than oters I have 2 questions for you
My weight is 154 pounds and we put the battery in front of the
plane and we put 12 pounds more in weight in front to compensate the weigh, do you think
is necessary for the plane this weight?
A:Yes it is necessary to have this weight in the front of a
Challenger - the minimum pilot weight is 165 lbs for a pilot in the front seat.
2.- Do you have any notice about a challenger was structural
fail in the principal sail wings?
I am not aware of any structural failures related to the wing
of a Challenger. I do know of many owners who have added X bracing cables to the wings to
stop them from moving when the ailerons are applied.
I preceate your comments . Hugo My Email is
hugoh@mail.internet.com.mx
I have a Quicksilver MX that with my weight wants to keep gaining
alt. Can I change the stabilizer washers to help this problem. If so what way does it need
to be shimed(up on the le or down) my weight is about 135
A: Jeff the minimum weight for the pilot of an MX was 155 lbs.
With your weight I would suggest that your check to make sure that your stabilizer is
level. If the front of the stab is lower than the back this will cause a nose up tendency.
Another thing that will cause nose up is if your king post is has to adjusted to near its
maximum. This will raise the back of the stab causing nose up, especially under power.
Switching to the tail boom kit helps - you can also add weight to the seat area, which in
effect makes the pilot heavier .
If I am it the wrong ballpark maybe you can point me in the right
direction. Jeff Spence
From: Tom Robeson
Dave:
I have something you may want to add to your alert #007 concerning the Haegar re-drive. I
found on my Chinook WT-11 w/277 that the prop thrust would crush the fibers of the prop
hub against the aluminum adapter (shown in your photo) causing the prop bolts to loosen. I
machined a "washer" the O.D. of the prop hub with a 1"hole and
corresponding bolt pattern and placed this between prop and hub.
The reason I was here in the first place was I suffered the exact failure you describe
with the adjusting bolt snapping. No harm to me or the plane(I landed in a "chisel
plowed" field, the Chinook has pretty good gear, eh?).
Tom Robeson
|
