Sling Aircraft inching their way to Oshkosh, big brass ones.

TonyWilliams said:
One of them had the propeller off and the engine area clearly attended to. It seems that not all went well.
Click to expand...

They completed the journey and landed safely at the destination. That's pretty "all went well" in my book!!
 
TonyWilliams said:
One of them had the propeller off and the engine area clearly attended to. It seems that not all went well.
Click to expand...
The large tent they originally had them under collapsed during the storm on Saturday night and struck (and damaged) several of the aircraft. Decent chance they were attending to some of the damage that was wrought by the tent collapse. I saw some pretty significant body damage (appeared to not cause airworthiness issues, but still...), and it wouldn't surprise me that a part of the tent structure pranged a prop pretty badly.

That actually begs the question... does a prop strike on a stationary prop still require the level of inspection that one would need with a rotating prop?
 
Steve Costello said:
That actually begs the question... does a prop strike on a stationary prop still require the level of inspection that one would need with a rotating prop?
Click to expand...

Potentially, yes. Just ask all those folks who encountered a collapsed hangar or a hurricane while tied down.
 
Steve Costello said:
The large tent they originally had them under collapsed during the storm on Saturday night and struck (and damaged) several of the aircraft. Decent chance they were attending to some of the damage that was wrought by the tent collapse. I saw some pretty significant body damage (appeared to not cause airworthiness issues, but still...), and it wouldn't surprise me that a part of the tent structure pranged a prop pretty badly.

That actually begs the question... does a prop strike on a stationary prop still require the level of inspection that one would need with a rotating prop?
Click to expand...
The storm happened 4 or 5 days before the high wings arrived.
 
Steve Costello said:
does a prop strike on a stationary prop still require the level of inspection that one would need with a rotating prop?
Click to expand...
FYI (apparently not totally relevant in this case, but...)
On a Rotax 912/914 the prop is not connected to the crankshaft - so if there were a a stationary event damage would likely be limited to the gearbox. With the engine running, most have an overload clutch in the gearbox that can protect the crank. The procedure in the event of a sudden stoppage involves removing the gearbox, putting a protractor on the crank and checking that the crankshaft is not twisted (you put a "stopper" in the plug holes and look for deviations from 0 / 180 degrees in each cylinder).
 
GaryM said:
So, are they planning to fly them back home now that Oshkosh is over?

(I assume not...)
Click to expand...

The factory plane ZU-SHW, will return via the Atlantic again. This time headed to London first and then making its way back to SA. Linda’s Sling will prolly head back to the Southeast where she is based. JP’s base will be Reno, but he will be traveling the world at some point in the near future, in his High Wing.
 
I know this is an old thread but JP recently released a 2 hour documentary on youtube called "the point of no return". The first hour is about him building the plane and the second hour is the flight from South Africa to Oshkosh. It was really well done and even my wife who isn't into flying videos got into this one.
 
Steve Costello said:
does a prop strike on a stationary prop still require the level of inspection that one would need with a rotating prop?
Click to expand...
Depends on the engine. On a Lycoming (I know this one was a Rotax, which is different) the concern is the sudden stoppage, with the bolts holding the magneto drive gear on the back of the crankshaft potentially fracturing so the accessory case at least needs to be removed.. That wouldn't be a concern with a stopped prop, but checking the crankshaft for runout would be a good idea.
 
Dana said:
Depends on the engine. On a Lycoming (I know this one was a Rotax, which is different) the concern is the sudden stoppage, with the bolts holding the magneto drive gear on the back of the crankshaft potentially fracturing so the accessory case at least needs to be removed.. That wouldn't be a concern with a stopped prop, but checking the crankshaft for runout would be a good idea.
Click to expand...
The gearbox is the sacrificial part on a Rotax. You have to remove it, but not the engine
 
ktup-flyer said:
The gearbox is the sacrificial part on a Rotax. You have to remove it, but not the engine
Click to expand...
Also… the Props fitted in the Sling’s are carbon fiber which takes the impact. My understanding is that this combination of carbon fiber props and gearbox essentially protect the engine in the prop strike scenario
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top