Well written Pete and I see your point and theirs too. We are all subject to some type of authority and a well written proposal will go a long way to getting things done over there.
Good luck Craig With the one and only KR2 Seafury www.kr2seafury.com --- On Mon, 8/29/11, pe...@heroic.co.uk <pe...@heroic.co.uk> wrote: > From: pe...@heroic.co.uk <pe...@heroic.co.uk> > Subject: Re: KR> Jabiru 3300 weight vs corvair > To: "KRnet" <kr...@mylist.net> > Date: Monday, August 29, 2011, 10:23 PM > In defence of the UK LAA, they have a > legal responsibility for all aircraft granted UK permits to > fly. > > The LAA represents the interests of UK fliers in many ways > including fighting an endless battle over loss of airspace, > EU rules harmonization. Whilst not perfect, the LAA largely > run by unpaid volunteers does a great job. > > If an aircraft crashes in UK, it always crashes close to > somewhere, so attracts a lot of media attention - leading to > all sorts of negative publicity for the LAA, this undermines > all the good work. > > The LAA engineering dept consists of 4 blokes who look > after all aspects of design build and maintenance of 2000+ > planes so time spent looking at one design proposal > affecting a single project has to be balanced again the time > needed by all the other work. For example an A/D for an RV6 > could affect a hundred or so planes. So you can see its not > so simple for the LAA to spend several days evaluating a > single use mod. > > The LAA engineering dept is funded by member subscriptions > and permit fees, so the cost of their work has to be born by > all members of the Association, so I hope you see why the > engineer says NO unless he gets a well researched and > documented proposal. > > Pete > -- > Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my > brevity. > > Patrick and Robin Russo <patru...@myfairpoint.net> > wrote: > > > Change the paragraph below to DOWNWARD FORCES FROM REPEATED > HARD LANDINGS > AND YOU HAVE IT. The fellow who wrote that paragraph below > hit it right on. > I could put a 400 pound/275HP chevy up front of my KR and > the final analysis > is I may not have an aircraft rated at more than 1.5-3 > "G"'s at > most.....wether it's flying, landing or taking off. > > Also, the persons or organization that said they would not > allow a Jabiru > because "it is too powerful" has the obligation to > demonstrate or prove that > it is indeed so. It is an absurd statement without the math > and back-up data > to educate us. It is a "weight issue, not a power issue" > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > It's the downward force of a hard landing that > might separate the engine > > > and > > firewall from the fuselage, not just pulling it > through the air. That's > > why > > it's more a weight issue than a power issue. Just > improving the load path > > from the mount to the outer edges of the firewall > (near the longerons) > > goes > > a long way to strengthening that setup. > > > > > _____________________________________________ > > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html > > _______________________________________ > Search the KRnet Archives at http://www.maddyhome.com/krsrch/index.jsp > to UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to krnet-le...@mylist.net > please see other KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html >
