Ooooo, Ooooo, Mr. Kotter, Mr. Kotter!

OK,  Kevin is right.  I cannot resist sharing what I have learned on this 
admittedly arcane issue.  But, I actually think I have figured it out, 
understand it, and can explain it and the history thereof, thanks to the 
insights of some wise 'Coupers who have gone before.

CONTENTIONS:
-The rudderless "Coupe was designed with the expectation that it would fly from 
grass fields.  So, landing sideways (as it was designed to do) in a cross wind 
did not overly wear on the tires.  When you land a Coupe in a crab, even with 
the nose high, the longggggggggg nose strut allows the nose wheel to contact 
the ground immediately, thereby providing directional control that would, 
otherwise, be absent due to lack of rudder pedals, and independent rudder 
control.

-HOWEVER, when you add rudders to a coupe, you can change technique and slip 
the bird down in full alignment with the runway.  This results in less tire 
wear than landing in a crab.  Some folks particularly prefer this on paved 
runways.  But, using that technique, you really don't want that nose gear 
reaching way out down and ahead of you in cross-control.  So, if you add a 
snubber cable, you can eliminate that problem.  It handles more like a Cessna 
or something similar.  You can hold the nose-gear off until your mains are 
solidly down.

-Problem is, some (or many) Coupes end up with no rudder pedals AND a snubber 
cable.  This is a situation at crossed purposes.  (Mine was like that.)  Wen 
you land in a crab, your directional control is delayed until the nose wheel 
touches down, and that touch-down is delayed due to the snubber cable.  Bit 
dicey.

CONCLUSION:
-The nose-gear snubber cable should not be installed on a bird unless it also 
has rudder pedals.  But, if a bird DOES have rudder pedals, the snubber is a 
good thing to have.

Anybody note inaccuracies or mis-perceptions here?

VR,
Dave Winters

To: [email protected]
From: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 17:27:23 +0000
Subject: [ercoupe-tech] Re: nose gear cable


















 



  


    
      
      
      Oh no, here we go................



Kevin1



--- In [email protected], BRIAN BARAGWANATH <baragwana...@...> wrote:

>

> There should not be eyeles or a cable on you nose gear. 

> 

> Brian Baragwanath

> N3085H 

> Cranland-28M

> 

> --- On Wed, 8/18/10, c.d.gu...@... <c.d.gu...@...> wrote:

> 

> 

> From: c.d.gu...@... <c.d.gu...@...>

> Subject: [ercoupe-tech] nose gear cable

> To: "ercoupe-tech" <[email protected]>

> Date: Wednesday, August 18, 2010, 12:18 PM

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> 

> #yiv2114504591 p {margin:0;}

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Fellows,

> Before my nose gear was rebuilt, the bolts attaching the scissors to the top 
> steering collar and the bottom fork, were not tight.  This, of course, is 
> wrong, but it allowed the cable "eyelet", to which the cable is attached, to 
> rotate freely around the bolts.  (the cable limits the nose gear to extend 
> completely).  This free movement in turn, allowed the cable crimp area, to 
> stay clear of the scissors as they moved up and down.

>  

> Now that the nose gear is rebuilt, and the bolts are tight as they should be 
> to pinch the steel bushing, the cable eyelet, which is also held on by the 
> same bolts (just like a washer), is not free and I see the cable loop is 
> beginning to get damaged.  Let me be clear, the eyelet I'm speaking of is an 
> elongated piece of metal with two holes, one with the cable looped through 
> and the other end with the bolt going through.

>  

> The damage I see is the small piece of metal inside the cable loop which is 
> part of the crimp.  It is beginning to dislodge from its proper place in the 
> crimped cable end.  Also the loop is no longer nice and flat, but is slightly 
> bent, probably from being somehow pinched as the scissors are moving up and 
> down.  

>  

> My question... is this the correct way to attach the cable?  It seems to me 
> the eyelet should have a bend in it to keep the cable away from the action of 
> the scissors.   

>  

> Thanks for any suggestions.

>  

> Darick

>





    
     

    
    






                                          

Reply via email to