What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

RV A model nose gear idea

LifeofReiley said:
Am I wrong? For this product to perform it's function, would it not be in contact with some part of the gear leg? :)
Click to expand...

The product only functions as a stop once the gear is bent to the point that it would fail were it bent further. This will only occur in a situation that would have failed the gear leg without the product installed. in any normal use you will not stress the leg to this degree. Allan
 
What is the total added weight of this (including the new fairing) as this will change the CG being so up front.
 
PerfTech said:
The product only functions as a stop once the gear is bent to the point that it would fail were it bent further. This will only occur in a situation that would have failed the gear leg without the product installed. in any normal use you will not stress the leg to this degree. Allan
Click to expand...

Just watched the video again.. PM sent :)
 
Being the owner of a 6A, I also have a great deal of interest in this or any other thought out idea that could reduce the damage of a nose wheel failure.

The original nose leg for the six started a taper 3/4" from the mount and ended .035 reduced dia. at the 11" mark. At that point it was 1" dia through the bend. Those had a failure near the socket if I recall.
Van's came out with the replacement and it had a dia just past the mount of about 1.102. At 17inches on center, the taper went to .88 and increased to 1" at the start of the bend.

I like the overload brace concept. I would like it more if it would have been able to fit under the existing Van's faring.

My concern is spin recovery with the increased side area of this needed faring.
 
Last edited:
Indication of Use?

Allan

As a 7a builder, I like what I see and your solution goes to point. I, like many of us, am not an engineer or even close. As a potential end user thou, if I have pushed the NG to far and engaged your safety device, what will the indications be? I'm not talking about an obvious bend that would appear in a major opps, (nose now standing higher vs on your back), but a minor opps that you may not know about? Maybe another way of looking at it is, will there always be a bend in the NG if your product has been used?

Thanks
 
Skeptics

This is without doubt the most elegant solution I have seen to this 'problem' to date. While the sceptics are right that more of the load will be transferred to a point higher in the gear, and into the engine mount itself, you have to consider what the brace is designed to do, that is prevent flip over accidents at low speeds.

I have no doubt that if this is fitted in the UK that our governing body will require a minimum number of landings and inspections of the engine mount for cracking at the weld at the gear leg socket, and deforming of the mount.

Given proper landing technique with the nose held off I doubt this would be a problem at all. With regular inspections of the engine mount a failure should not occur there.

Consider the damage done in these flip over accidents, against the need to inspect a mount...........for me its what you guys call a 'No brainer', I would fit one tomorrow.

Bottom line is if you hit the nose wheel into the ground hard enough to damage the engine mount you are in deep do do anyway!!!
 
New gear

Forgot to mention.....we do have a new gear designed and ready to test over here which has the nut on top........... I just need a gear leg to adapt to put it on if anyone has on lying around. I will post an image of this on my blog, I suspect that wit this new stiffener this will never get off the ground but you never know.

http://www.aerobulder.blogspot.com
 
Not Convinced

I thought his explanation of the way the forces affect the gear leg were spot on. However, I am concerned that the device moves the forces from the flexible portion of the gear leg (middle) to the inflexible portion of the leg (near the engine mount. Flex absorbs energy. In addition, is it harder to bend the leg by the engine mount? I'm not sure especially now that the lever is longer i.e., the entire length of the gear leg.

I still think a larger diameter nose wheel will solve a lot of problems. I'd like to see comparison data with the standard diameter wheel to larger wheels.
 
Av8torTom said:
I thought his explanation of the way the forces affect the gear leg were spot on. However, I am concerned that the device moves the forces from the flexible portion of the gear leg (middle) to the inflexible portion of the leg (near the engine mount. Flex absorbs energy. In addition, is it harder to bend the leg by the engine mount? I'm not sure especially now that the lever is longer i.e., the entire length of the gear leg.

I still think a larger diameter nose wheel will solve a lot of problems. I'd like to see comparison data with the standard diameter wheel to larger wheels.
Click to expand...

If you don't get into any unusual (over-stress pogo jump inducing) situations the stiffener does nothing.

I like the elegance of the design, if everything is normal, it works just like Van designed it - the stiffener has no effect so the stress at the motor mount is unaltered....:)
 
Cool!

Yes, very cool idea and simple design. I will be following the progress of this!

Even though the post did break one of the forum rules I think this is a import post. This issue concerns many RV flyers.
 
Av8torTom said:
Yes, I noticed the device only engaged after a certain amount of bending took place.
Click to expand...

No matter how you look at it, a straighter but bent gear leg (at the top)........is better than a leg turned into a half circle, which allows the prop to strike the ground.

L.Adamson
 
Not fully convinced

In the Youtube video AntiSplatAero.com Compression Test at the 1:39 minute mark the inventor makes a statement that during taxi the load that the tire is supporting shifts from being vertical from the center of the contact patch to a position at the leading edge of the contact patch.

Perhaps there is a semantic or definition problem here but I cannot see how this load shifts. Provided that the wheel axle bearings are properly adjusted and that there are no other retarding torques between the wheel and the axle (like the disc brake that is only mounted on the main gear), I believe the load remains vertical in the center of the contact patch.

However, as the tire spins up on landing there are some inertia forces that result in a horizontal load at the axle centerline. Also any kind of bumps in the landing surface can also create horizontal loads at the axle. Combined with the vertical load the resultant will be at an angle to the vertical towards the front of the tire. Perhaps this is what the inventor meant.

In addition, the gear leg is an undamped spring and may resonate if the forcing frequency coincides with the spring rate. This effect is seen in some videos.

Thebrace acts somewhat like overload springs on a pickup truck, that is it does not come into play until there is a certain load and deflection on the main spring, or in the aircraft case, the nose gear leg.

I think the idea is good even if the explanation of the load vector moving to the front of the contact patch is confusing. The inventor did a wonderful job on the test rig and I am very impressed by it.

I would like to learn more about how the actual loads were derived. Was it from taxi testing of an actual -A model RV? If so, how were the bumps or hollows in the surface arrived at? Was it from the regulations in FAR Part 23 relating to landing gear? This regulation allows for weight transfer to the nose gear due to braking of the main wheels and for horizontal load components from bumps being added to the vertical loads.
 
L.Adamson said:
No matter how you look at it, a straighter but bent gear leg (at the top)........is better than a leg turned into a half circle, which allows the prop to strike the ground.

L.Adamson
Click to expand...

...and is the potential start of a forward flip...:eek:
 
Order Info!!!!!!!!

I talked to Doug Reeves today and set up the advertising arrangements so I can use the forums to promote our products. He is a great guy and everyone here owes a debt of gratitude for this wonderful resource he has provided us all. The e-mail and orders have been unbelievable to say the least. I am going to post a copy of the e-mail I sent out today as it may save everyone some time and typing (something that I obviously don't excel at). To place an order and get on our list please use the address [email protected] This is operational now and the web site will be up soon. Thank You, Allan :D

Dear fellow RV owners;

I am sending this to all of you that have requested information on our new offering for the RV-A models.

“ THE NOSE JOB “ Firstly I would like to say thank you for the interest, acceptance reception, positive statements of approval, and last but not least all of the many orders. The response has been somewhat over whelming as we sold our first run of thirty five pieces in a few hours of announcing their availability. There are over one hundred fifty requests for information, and the videos have over two thousand hits in the last seventy two hours. I have talked to Doug Reeves from VAF .com and made arrangements for our advertising on that forum so our posts about “The Nose Job “will be back up this evening. We started building more this AM 10/10/11 and should be able to ship in ten days as the heat treating and plating processes are not done in house and require a few days, so PLEASE bear with us, it will be worthwhile. If you wish to order one and haven’t done so, we will put you on the list as the order is received via the e-mail “[email protected] “. The current pricing is very low and hopefully we can keep it that way, $379.00 plus shipping as we are trying to promote sales and get the ball rolling. Looks as if that isn’t going to be a problem.

We have had requests as to the weight of this modification, 30 oz. or less installed, with average paint coverage. Typical installation time once the fairing in prepared and painted is about thirty minutes or so. Our web site will be operational soon at “ AntiSplatAero.com “ with this and more information.

Again we want to say thank you to all who have responded and ordered our products. Word of mouth is extremely important and very effective. Please tell your friends to have a look at our videos and by all means please do a small review of this modification on the VAF Forums.

Best Regards, Allan Anti Splat Aero LLC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYnT1z23HVI
Compression test http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4JL1xyAhBA
 
Last edited:
More Nose Job Info!!!!!!!!

I have received some requests for the kit without the fairing as many people that operate off dirt or grass strips don't use them or wheel pants. This is not a problem and takes about $75.00 off the price. Allan
 
I really like the thought that has gone into this product. I would not hesitate to purchase if I believed the product can deliver the promise.

What I question is the presentation is a static instead of a dynamic force.

I copied these links from videos that Ken had posted some time ago. With all the tiny cameras that folks have and mount everywhere, I would like to see an installed product in a side by side comparision.

The first video is of taxi, takeoff and landing at Lenhardt airpark (7S9).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYCerJM_Qww

The next two are takeoff and landing on pavement one from 7S9 to UAO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdOL44YGMX0

and then the return trip from UAO to 7S9.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gY_XTSLBggM
 
Actually Webb,

Looking at the video's you reference, I don't think the "Nose Fix" would be doing anything. There is simply not enough flex in the nose strut for the end parts of the brace to be touching the strut. In those conditions it looks like the brace is just along for the ride. The interesting thing would be to see a video of a nose wheel hitting the same chuck hole braced and un braced. Any volunteers for the unbraced trial? I'll do the braced trial.
 
Vans Reply to "Nose Job"

Has there been any official or un-official comments on this product from Vans? Seems like there will/should be at some point as the implications to Vans may be large.
 
Great solution Allen, for all the reasons you point out in your videos. They’re selling quickly so user reviews will be showing up here soon.

Looks like the cradles on each end would be wide enough to catch the gear leg even if you had a glancing side blow from a gofer mound ? And the attach bracket looks sturdy enough to withstand the impulse of taking one straight on ?

These types of Dynamic Tests could be done on a setup like Barry uses here (maybe he bought one already?) http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=68751

Looks like a great product Allen, Thanks.

pk
 
I could repeat the test....

Webb said:
I really like the thought that has gone into this product. I would not hesitate to purchase if I believed the product can deliver the promise.

What I question is the presentation is a static instead of a dynamic force.

I copied these links from videos that Ken had posted some time ago. With all the tiny cameras that folks have and mount everywhere, I would like to see an installed product in a side by side comparision.

The first video is of taxi, takeoff and landing at Lenhardt airpark (7S9).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYCerJM_Qww

The next two are takeoff and landing on pavement one from 7S9 to UAO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdOL44YGMX0

and then the return trip from UAO to 7S9.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gY_XTSLBggM
Click to expand...

I am willing to make new videos with the brace installed (need one loaned to me to do it). As Mike pointed out, I don't think it would change much because I was not stressing my gear to the failure point. Which by the way was the point of the videos. Normal operation does not overstress the gear.

Kent
 
A couple thoughts / questions.

This looks like it may be good solution for the failure of the nose gear.
But is make me wonder that when the failure mode occurs where does the energy go that would have been absorbed in the gear leg bending in the middle?

I heard on the video that the bending is done up higher and causes the nose to lift up. I can believe this but I think additional energy is going to be transferred into the motor mount and firewall as well. This would lead to the possibility that those components would need to be inspected more throughly after a landing incident.

Will it be easy to determine when the extra brace started doing some load transferring?

Maybe if a small peace of tape is placed between the gear leg and the brace that you could inspect after every hard landing to determine if the brace had transferred some load?

Kent
 
kentb said:
This looks like it may be good solution for the failure of the nose gear.
But is make me wonder that when the failure mode occurs where does the energy go that would have been absorbed in the gear leg bending in the middle?

I heard on the video that the bending is done up higher and causes the nose to lift up. I can believe this but I think additional energy is going to be transferred into the motor mount and firewall as well. This would lead to the possibility that those components would need to be inspected more throughly after a landing incident.

Will it be easy to determine when the extra brace started doing some load transferring?

Maybe if a small peace of tape is placed between the gear leg and the brace that you could inspect after every hard landing to determine if the brace had transferred some load?

Kent
Click to expand...
Just like many RV builders out here I am not an engineer. However, I, also like many RV builders out here, do have a brain that I use quite extensively. That brain tends to say: "Yeah, the bending force is indeed moved to the upper section of the leg, and perhaps even all the way up into the engine mount. So, what! That is a good thing." I would rather have to tear down an engine mount and replace it or a bent beyond repair gear leg because it failed than have to repair the entire airplane, rebuild an engine, replace a prop and perhaps patch and repair my and my wife's body after a complete flip-over.

I fail to see where transferring bending forces into a much more substantial section of the gear leg from a tapered thinner section is a detrimental thing. As has been stated by the OP and by many of the other posters; the standard flexing of the gear leg is not compromised during normal operations. So, only when an extreme condition occurs does the force get transferred to a much beefier and stiffer section of the gear leg. Thus giving a better chance for diverting catastrophe.

For all the engineers out here, please continue posting your thoughts on this design. My non-engineer trained brain is more than ready to lap up any additional data you can provide. However, given the current information I have on what I have read to date I see this as an "Ah Ha!" moment in the ongoing attempts to remedy the RV nose gear problem(s).
 
kentb said:
Will it be easy to determine when the extra brace started doing some load transferring?

Maybe if a small peace of tape is placed between the gear leg and the brace that you could inspect after every hard landing to determine if the brace had transferred some load?
Click to expand...
Strain gages could be stuck easily on different parts of the NG leg...with the data recorded over a number of landings, to monitor the stress/strain on the NG. I haven't looked at strain gages since college, and that was a long time ago, but their concept is very simple and with all the digitizing of measurements now it could be a simple and quick way to acquire accurate data about what's going on with the NG.
 
Brace loaded indicator

Per Kentb, folks are going to be curious if the brace has been loaded. A piece of tape or other device to show the brace having been loaded may be beneficial. What about some kind of easy to inspect popup indicator machined or attached at each end of the brace. If both indicators show popped then the brace has been loaded. This would require inspection ports on the fairing. Perhaps this can be a feature.
 
If it gives you peace of mind then just do it.

If you follow the instruction of the experts in landing an RV nosewheel, namely the highly qualified transition trainers, then no worries.
 
But Rough Fields

Agreed that proper technique will keep one out of trouble on good surfaces, however my interest in the brace derives from the need to use a grass runway. My home airport at my farm is just 1650 feet long with good but not perfectly smooth grass. We also get a lot of ant hills and other irregularities during most of the year, so the brace, I believe, would prevent the pogo stick splat on this field. In looking at the video by Alan, i would tend to believe that the extra stiffness added at the point when the brace does contact the strut would provide enough strength to roll over a small ant hill without any damage to the strut at all. I mean, in the video he demonstrated a static force of 1500 pounds at an angle with little deflection of the strut up near the engine mount. That is why I will be installing the brace as soon as Allan can get me one. (hint hint Alan.)
 
sirlegin said:
If you follow the instruction of the experts in landing an RV nosewheel, namely the highly qualified transition trainers, then no worries.
Click to expand...

My best RV landing ever (and boy was it good!), was immediately followed by my worst. I suppose, once you reach the peak of perfection, then it can only go down hill from there...

L.Adamson --- RV6 with a bent A
 
Alignment

What will keep the brace in the proper alignment? Simple friction from the clamp? If it were to rotate to the side, wouldn't that be bad?:confused:
 
Looks like a good fix to me. Frankly I've been bummed out for the last couple of years about my decision to build a -A model due to the high number of flips on landing.
 
Just watched the video...

Any experts on "proper" (say airliner) gear design here? What he has come up with is a "2 stage" damper - the advantage being that stage 1 is what is currently out there and as design / satisfactory. Stage 2 only comes into effect when needed, when potentially all bets are off as to a safe outcome. Do I recall correctly that the Hyd units on, say, an airliner, are "multi stage"?

All I would add is before it becomes "the standard", is to test one to destruction mounted on an actual 'A' engine mount - and see where / what / how fails. Ideally, as people say, it is the gear leg break, but the engine mount failing would be acceptable. Also, some indicator at the bottom end to indicate when a further inspection is required i.e. the brace "came into action".

Andy
 
Andy Hill said:
Just watched the video...

Any experts on "proper" (say airliner) gear design here? What he has come up with is a "2 stage" damper - the advantage being that stage 1 is what is currently out there and as design / satisfactory. Stage 2 only comes into effect when needed, when potentially all bets are off as to a safe outcome. Do I recall correctly that the Hyd units on, say, an airliner, are "multi stage"?

All I would add is before it becomes "the standard", is to test one to destruction mounted on an actual 'A' engine mount - and see where / what / how fails. Ideally, as people say, it is the gear leg break, but the engine mount failing would be acceptable. Also, some indicator at the bottom end to indicate when a further inspection is required i.e. the brace "came into action".

Andy
Click to expand...

In the course of developing this this product we researched and reviewed virtually all reported incidents involving nose gears on RV aircraft. I did not find even one that had damage at the engine mount. When a catastrophic failure occurs the damage moves progressively up the gear leg and they bend at the top with or without the "Nose Job" installed. This being said, the forces applied to the engine mount are virtually the same. If the gear leg is going to bend at the top, say thirty degrees over an eight inch radius the same pressure is required with or without the modification. We have hours of testing on actual aircraft with an entire array of strain gauges recording all data as well as the tests done in another fixture that show and measure the forces applied to the attach point or engine mount. Our data confirms that this is not a concern. Regards all, Allan Anti Splat Aero LLC
 
Last edited:
Andy Hill said:
What he has come up with is a "2 stage" damper - the advantage being that stage 1 is what is currently out there and as design / satisfactory. Stage 2 only comes into effect when needed, when potentially all bets are off as to a safe outcome.
Click to expand...

Two stage spring (just polishing the pins....).

I think it's an excellent concept. All design is the art of intelligent compromise.
 
Looks like a nice safety net, Allan. The engineers here are impressed -- and that's no easy feat!

One thing to consider as this catches on and you find yourself swamped with inquiries ...

When I watched the video, it was a bit confusing. I'm not intimately familiar with Van's nosegear design, and wasn't sure what I was seeing at first. Once the Nose Job was removed and the test was repeated without it in place, I went back to see the Nose Job in action.

You might consider shooting another video and switching the demonstration to show what happens to the stock nose gear and THEN how it changes with the Nose Job in place -- i.e., demonstrate the problem first and then the solution. You might also wish to write out a script ... that would cut the video time in half.

Congrats on a winner of a product.
 
N8RV said:
Looks like a nice safety net, Allan. The engineers here are impressed -- and that's no easy feat!

One thing to consider as this catches on and you find yourself swamped with inquiries ...

When I watched the video, it was a bit confusing. I'm not intimately familiar with Van's nosegear design, and wasn't sure what I was seeing at first. Once the Nose Job was removed and the test was repeated without it in place, I went back to see the Nose Job in action.

You might consider shooting another video and switching the demonstration to show what happens to the stock nose gear and THEN how it changes with the Nose Job in place -- i.e., demonstrate the problem first and then the solution. You might also wish to write out a script ... that would cut the video time in half.

Congrats on a winner of a product.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree with you more and as soon as I get past this huge surge and get a little time I will definitely make another video. What you see up there at present was very crude and done in just one take with virtually no preparation on planing. I am pretty sure that is evident but I wanted to get something up and running. I had no idea the response would be this wonderful. Thank you for your encouragement and comments on this product as they are all appreciated. Regards, Allan Anti Splat Aero LLC
 
PerfTech said:
. . .We have hours of testing on actual aircraft with an entire array of strain gauges recording all data as well as the tests done in another fixture that show and measure the forces applied to the attach point or engine mount. Our data confirms that this is not a concern. Regards all, Allan Anti Splat Aero LLC
Click to expand...
I would like to request you present this very data on your website when you get it up and running. This is the kind of detailed testing data I would like to see in addition to your video and description.
 
Test Data

I would also like to see the test data on your website. I would also like to know if you used the criteria in FAR Part 23.499 Ground Load Conditions and Assumptions Supplementary Conditions for Nosewheels (yes I know RVs are not certified airplanes) which state:
In determining the ground loads on nose wheels and affected supporting structures, and assuming that the shock absorbers and tires are in their static positions, the following conditions must be met:

(a) For aft loads, the limit force components at the axle must be?

(1) A vertical component of 2.25 times the static load on the wheel; and

(2) A drag component of 0.8 times the vertical load.

(b) For forward loads, the limit force components at the axle must be?

(1) A vertical component of 2.25 times the static load on the wheel; and

(2) A forward component of 0.4 times the vertical load.

(c) For side loads, the limit force components at ground contact must be?

(1) A vertical component of 2.25 times the static load on the wheel; and

(2) A side component of 0.7 times the vertical load.
 
RVbySDI said:
I would like to request you present this very data on your website when you get it up and running. This is the kind of detailed testing data I would like to see in addition to your video and description.
Click to expand...

Please don't take this response in a negative light as I certainly don't wish to offend anyone. The raw data that we have gathered over the last year to enable us to design, test, modify, improve and bring this product to market would fill an entire file drawer and occupies several gigs on our computers. The raw data would not be discernible or have any relevance to anyone without the software, information gathering system and modeling cad programs we use. I surely could not post those here, nor will I spend another month or two typing this information into a format that most people would not understand anyway. I have never seen a manufacturer of any product do this and would not expect them to. I have tried to graciously address all questions and concerns presented to us and explain the product to the best of our abilities. We feel this unit speaks for itself and warrants little if any further explanation. Don't like or desire the product? Don't purchase it! Allan Anti Splat Aero LLC
 
terrye said:
I would also like to see the test data on your website. I would also like to know if you used the criteria in FAR Part 23.499 Ground Load Conditions and Assumptions Supplementary Conditions for Nosewheels
Click to expand...
Terry. Have you asked Van for his analysis and compliance with the spec?
This is experimental aircraft. As builder you have the choice to use or not use any product. In fact you have the freedom to do the testing yourself.

I applaud all the work done by anti splat aero. Just the name makes me want what ever they are selling.
 
Last edited:
PerfTech said:
Please don't take this response in a negative light as I certainly don't wish to offend anyone. The raw data that we have gathered over the last year to enable us to design, test, modify, improve and bring this product to market would fill an entire file drawer and occupies several gigs on our computers. The raw data would not be discernible or have any relevance to anyone without the software, information gathering system and modeling cad programs we use. I surely could not post those here, nor will I spend another month or two typing this information into a format that most people would not understand anyway. I have never seen a manufacturer of any product do this and would not expect them to. I have tried to graciously address all questions and concerns presented to us and explain the product to the best of our abilities. We feel this unit speaks for itself and warrants little if any further explanation. Don't like or desire the product? Don't purchase it! Allan Anti Splat Aero LLC
Click to expand...
Has anyone asked Vans for their complete engineering data.. Didn,t think so...
Even Great designs Like Vans aircraft can always be improved on.
Mick
 
mick said:
Has anyone asked Vans for their complete engineering data.. Didn,t think so...
Even Great designs Like Vans aircraft can always be improved on.
Mick
Click to expand...

If Vans were a start-up company with no prior reputation in the industry, then you bet people would be asking for more detailed engineering data.

I like what Allan has done here and applaude him whole-heartedly. He deserves every penny he makes on this product. BUT, it is perfectly OK that some people have a greater need for details than others. We are all different in this regard and that's just flat OK.
 
PerfTech said:
Please don't take this response in a negative light as I certainly don't wish to offend anyone. The raw data that we have gathered over the last year to enable us to design, test, modify, improve and bring this product to market would fill an entire file drawer and occupies several gigs on our computers. The raw data would not be discernible or have any relevance to anyone without the software, information gathering system and modeling cad programs we use. I surely could not post those here, nor will I spend another month or two typing this information into a format that most people would not understand anyway. I have never seen a manufacturer of any product do this and would not expect them to. I have tried to graciously address all questions and concerns presented to us and explain the product to the best of our abilities. We feel this unit speaks for itself and warrants little if any further explanation. Don't like or desire the product? Don't purchase it! Allan Anti Splat Aero LLC
Click to expand...

2 points here.

First - to Allan - Peace. Be Still. There is no need here for getting cranky with the people asking questions. Answer them if you can, ignore them if you must - but be polite. Take the high road and remember the primary rule about public speaking - less is more.

Second - to everyone else - Allan has obviously gone to a lot of trouble to create a product to fill a perceived need for the market. If you like it, buy it. If you don't, ask questions about it. If those questions are not answered, you can either do your own testing or create your own product to compete with it. Choose and act, or hush. You can be on the stage or in the audience - pick one.

Disclaimer - I have no affiliation with the product or producer, but I am a private businessman that has produced my own patented devices, and I feel his pain. I for one will be purchasing one of his devices because, at this present time, it appears to be a better answer for a perceived problem than anyone else has bothered to offer.
 
Last edited:
So Where is the Input from Vans Aircraft?

I have a lot of respect for the engineering and marketing performance of Van and his aircraft. it certainly is a fun aircraft to fly. Van has not been shy re. modifications to his designs.

Prior to my ownership, my plane ate a nose gear and constant speed prop with a $25K bill needed to fix it. Luckily no one was injured in the landing. I would really like to hear what our mothership has to say re. "The Nose Job". I know the previous owner of my plane thought he got the "Hose Job".

While I have not had any issues with the latest Vans nose gear I really would like to hear what Van thinks of tthis idea.
 
Paralysis of Anal ysis

Allan, I am beginning to feel sorry for you.
Better get some good liability insurance and charge another $100
for you product.
 
Sorry Guys!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry Guys!!!!!!!!!!

I guess I let my frustration start to show. You guys are all the best and I really love this forum. Actually I have yet to meet a RV owner I didn't like or one not worth talking to. Am working trying to get the web site operational so will sign off. Thanks, Allan:eek: Anti Splat Aero LLC
 
Vans data

mick said:
Has anyone asked Vans for their complete engineering data.. Didn,t think so...
Even Great designs Like Vans aircraft can always be improved on.
Mick
Click to expand...

Actually yes. I had some fellow NASA engineers looking at an improved nose gear design for the RV's. As someone stated earlier a larger nose wheel is a simple improvement but its not enough to eliminate the risk completely and I believe there should be enough design margin to accomodate a less than perfect landing (lots of Grummans out there without any similar accidents). We got pretty far along with an updated gear design but it would have saved countless test hours and dollars to have the original gear leg spec data. I personally spoke to Van and he agreed to provide the design data on the nose gear. (I stressed and stress again the intent was to make an improved more robust gear vs correcting any perceived design deficiency.) I followed this up again during Sun-n-Fun a couple of years ago directly with Van and again was told no problem. However no data has ever materialized.
D2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top