| Author | Message | ||
     Jim Siebel |
Brian, That is an Auriga nosegear. If you use it, it will require additional reinforcement around the spindle area. I can take a photo of my mods if desired. I know of two of these gear that have failed during hard nosewheel landings. Jim Siebel | ||
| Jim Lewis |
I have the Aurgia and the same nose gear as Brian shown in the photo,s. Have had it x-rayed and found the welding to be very good. Generally the failures have resulted from one of three things. 1. poor construction in the welds, 2. lack of the reinforcing plates on top of the spindle area, or 3. hard landings and/or excessive nowe gear loads or some combination of the above. NOW: I have the Aurgia fiberglas main gear that has the two steel reinforcing plates that are to be installed on the upper bend at the wing. QUESTION? Do the series of holes go up ( toward the wing ) or do they go down toward the wheel. Also does the lower gear leg clamping bracket have to be drilled (fore and aft) after it is located on the gear leg. Thanks JIM LEWIS | ||
| Brynjar Thordarson (Benny) |
Good day to you good people. The nose gear I have is the original Wheeler gear. A decision was made years ago to reinforce that gear after 2 (if I remember right) broke at the axle. I finally found a place where I can have mine reinforced. The questions: Does anyone have a blueprint of the reinforcements made? Has anyone installed a sort of shock absorbing system? (The one from Larry is too bulky in my case.) Should there not be a reinforcement at the "T"? Thanks. | ||
| Phil & Margie Hodge (N410mp) |
I always thought that gear up landings were limited to RG craft. I am sorry to report that Saturday, shortly after landing #56, I joined some of you in learning otherwise. N410MP, sporting an IO550, MT 4 blade prop, and cruciform tail suffered a broken nose gear, with subsequent collateral damage and significant loss of pride. The gear broke with a brittle fracture through the heat-affected-zone of a weld. Properly fabricated and heat treated welds aren't supposed to break that way, and I hope to have a metallurgist examine the parts and comment in more detail. As with most accidents, I suspect a lot of little items all conspired towards this failure, and I do not intend to blame the part exclusively. I'm also not reporting this looking for sympathy (although I could use some, sniff). Rather I'm trying to learn all I can so that I and others can avoid repeating the experience. Bill Copeland recommends a nose gear force not to exceed 400#. Is this a gut feeling, or does it have some engineering basis? I estimate my gear had 554# on it at that time, so simply moving a few things or adding ballast may be all she needs. This was the latest greatest nose gear from EA. Larry - does Dick think 554# is too much? What is a safe number? Does anyone have any thoughts on the necessity of a prop hub and engine teardown? The wood/carbon blades disintegrated on impact, and the engine continued to turn at least twice judging by the blade destruction, so it may not have stopped suddenly. Avemco, Continental and MT will all have the final say on this question, but I'd appreciate other's input. I'm also wondering about the advantages or disadvantages of a tail dragger versus nose wheel for my configuration. I know there is/was at least one tail dragging cruciform around. Anyone know anything about it? I recall not being enamored with the look as she sat on the ground, but if that would eliminate a problem inherent in the small tail / big engine combination, and if the conversion is reasonable, I may consider it. Further incentive is that I'm based at a grass strip. All thoughts, comments and suggestions would be much appreciated. Phil | ||
| Bill Copeland |
Phil/Marge: Very sorry to hear of your nose gear failure. It would be interesting to see pics of the damage/failure or your best description of the failure. It might help some of the rest of us to know what to pay attention to. As far as the 400 lb limit goes, that figure has just come from a lot of discussion about several failures, but it is not based on any engineering analysis. It seems that most failures occurred on heavier nose loaded examples. I guess the best advice would be to unload the nose as much as possible as the basic design seems to provide marginal strength - or we have a lot of poor welders out there. I am under the impression that Larry's nose gear are heat treated and stress relieved but do not believe that they are X-rayed. Hope to hear that your're back in the air soon!! | ||
| Anonymous |
The results of this investigation is of great concern to all of us, please keep us informed. FWIW, my low tail Express has a Lyc 540 and 3 blade metal prop. Also I have the new design nose gear assy from Larry. There were problems with the earlier Auriga design nose assy and based on the failure mode of the Auriga design the latest design by Larry appeared to correct for the problem. Would it be possible for you to post a picture of the failed gear assy? I do not speak for the group, but I would bet most all of us are willing to help in any way we can to get to the bottom line on this investigation. Just ask. My empty wt is 1765 and with a 290 lb nose, 735 and 740 mains. John jharlow@onearrow.net | ||
| Bruce Newlan |
Phil/Marge Sorry about your mishap. Regarding tail draggers and cruciform tails, I would highly recommending forgetting that option. There are two trail dragger versions flying, John Kee and myself. Both have Series 90 tails. I barely have enough right rudder with the large tail, but I don't have any nose gear failures. Would be happy to talk to anyone about Express tail draggers. E-mail me at bnewlan@kovesnewlanwine.com | ||
| Phil & Margie Hodge (N410mp) |
Spent today moving her into a hangar, taking stuff apart, and taking pictures. I will post a link to all the pix when I get them back in a few days. Still preliminary information, but upon further review I think the incident may have been nothing more than a tail stall while still a few feet up, such that the nose impacted at a steep enough angle to cause the yoke to dig into the pavement. The nose gear bent a lot before it broke, and the break does not appear to have started at the weld, so I think I can eliminate any problems there. The runway had just been seal coated, so all my marks are still crystal clear on the pavement. First mark is a 16" long by 7/8" deep gouge from the yoke, 100' later is a series of 12 prop strikes. That means the prop continued to rotate as it disintegrated, so I'm hoping the engine is OK. That final determination will be made by Continental. Each prop strike is further apart, showing that the prop was slowing down as she slid. The engine mount is bent at the two lower inner attach points to the firewall, and the stainless steel is bent a little, but there does not appear to be any sign of distress to the fiberglass firewall or gussets inside the cockpit. So at this point it looks like all I may need to do is replace the engine mount, nose gear, propellor and nose wheel pant. I'll know more after I get the engine removed, but that's all I see so far. And of course I need to shift some weight aft, too, so the tail isn't working so hard at low speeds. As I said, I'll post pix as soon as I get them, and probably have a few more observations and questions then. Phil | ||
| Jim Butler |
I would like to congratulate Phil for revealing the cause of the problem. It seems like it is too easy to jump to a conclusion and blame something on the factory. Then, when we find out later that the factory was not at fault, we never quite get around to revealing that fact, at least with the same gusto we used to condem them. It is very much in all of our best interest for the factory to survive and be successful. Phil, you didn't do that, you are a class act and you have my respect. Jim Butler | ||
| Jay Villalva |
Something else to through into the discussion... which main gear are you using? The factory changed the geometry of the main gear wing attachment hardware to move the main wheels forward. This will lesson the weight on the nose wheel and allow for easier rotation on take-off. The difference between Phil's 554 lbs and John's 290 lbs on the nose wheels is significant and will adversely effect loading if just weight is added some-where aft to reduce the weight on the nose wheel. |