Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

the BIGGEST BADEST STRUTS

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • the BIGGEST BADEST STRUTS

    Hello Lee , Dave, karl , John . and all Tribe members :
    You guys are killing me softly with all the reading!:
    I don.t care about all the weights and orginial sizes etc.
    What im looking for is
    someone ( and I know several of u can) to tell me who has the Biggest strongest struts for the BC12d
    Thanks in advance and LOVE u guys
    Your humble follower
    B 52 Norm
    1946 BC12-D1 Nc 44496
    Quicksilver AMPIB, N4NH
    AOPA 11996 EAA 32643
    NRA4734945
    Lake Thunderbird , Cherokee Village
    Somewhere on the 38° parallel in NE Arkansas

  • #2
    Re: the BIGGEST BADEST STRUTS

    Stormman Norm;
    Supposedly Univair's are the beefiest. That said, I haven't heard how the struts from Alaska compare... just factory, Wag-Aero, and Univairs. Speaking of Alaska -- I once saw a Cub with a 6x6 and 2x2 piece of Douglas fir used as a temporary strut. I guess that's beefier still. I think the Univairs are certified but the Alaskan fix is likely "unfir-t-fied", so to speak... sorry, I try to be serious about this stuff but find serious sometimes, intolerable.

    With regards; ED OBRIEN
    Last edited by Ed O'Brien; 12-03-2007, 10:29.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: the BIGGEST BADEST STRUTS

      Actually, I AM curious about how many different size struts are out there. My front struts are 3.825" x 1.420" and the rears are 2.383" x .997". They are clean, straight and corrosion free (based on MY inspection, not the FAA one). The reason I would like to know all the rest of the strut dimensions out there is, if MY tiny little prewar struts are still good after 66 years with their tiny net section and weaker material (haven't tested them, but doubt they are 4130!) how can the newer MUCH larger and stronger struts with the new material be unsafe with only a minor loss of net section to corrosion. This is why I think we have heard about newer struts with holes corroded through them that didn't fail in service. There is so much excess strength margin they are actually safe with significant damage. That was why I pushed for visual inspection and punching for the newer struts (and lost).
      In the mean time, how about everyone measuring their struts and posting the dimensions so we know how many of the little ones are out there (including the new replacement struts)? When I replace mine (yea, I give up too if nothing else changes) I would like to at least get the closest struts to the originals I can. I have seen planes with AFT struts larger than my front ones!

      Since no one actually makes "pre-war" struts, I wonder if I can build my own (sealed) to the original dimensions, as owner manufactured parts? After all, no one does make my part number, they are asking me to put the new part number on. Was the original unsafe all those decades?
      Hank

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: the BIGGEST BADEST STRUTS

        Hi Norman....
        By golly it good to hear from you.......It is a little dull with out you.. Not like the ol'Topica days.....
        I don't know about the others, but the Airframe struts are fat enough to fit up floats on a DC 3. I have not hung them on yet but I can tell you that they won't have the grace of the original struts. I am sure that they will be more resistant to latteral forces but I am sure that the wings will come apart or the attach fittings will fail before any of the new struts will fail in tension.
        Probablly (I say that to help defray arguements, criticism, mumbling, etc.)

        You need to stop playing with your other toys and get your bird together before the nut cases kill off flying and we have to sneak out at night and fly with glo sticks and silencers and flash hiders on our stacks. I'm thinking about organizing a bunch of pilots to go about tacking reflective paper plates on top of power poles so we can use black light flashlight to light up to poles to find our way about in the dark.

        If I don't get some flight time I'm going to go strange.

        RonC
        Ron C
        N96995

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: the BIGGEST BADEST STRUTS

          Funny you should say that Ron. On my strip (out in the middle of NOWHERE, with NO vertical obstacles in my approach lane higher than about three feet for three miles out from my threshold), I have installed a BUNCH of solar powered walk way lights on the edges of the runway, 50 feet apart.
          From the main road, one mile away at it's closest,they can not be seen at night.
          From the air, they can not be seen, as they have top shields, and shine down at a 45 degree angle.
          However, below 250 feet, on centerline, and 1/2 mile out, they stick out like a sore thumb.
          The other day, I took the GPS that I use in my ultralight, and during the daytime, I set a waypoint when I was 1/4 of a mile out, and at 150 feet.
          It works FINE at night. I fly around the desert in the dark, and land with no problem. Brie

          Originally posted by Ron Coleman View Post
          Hi Norman....
          You need to stop playing with your other toys and get your bird together before the nut cases kill off flying and we have to sneak out at night and fly with glo sticks and silencers and flash hiders on our stacks. I'm thinking about organizing a bunch of pilots to go about tacking reflective paper plates on top of power poles so we can use black light flashlight to light up to poles to find our way about in the dark.

          If I don't get some flight time I'm going to go strange.

          RonC

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: the BIGGEST BADEST STRUTS

            Brie, I've been looking at those yard lights ever since they came out wondering when some smart person was going to come up with a really good version to use out in the tulies (sp?) where there isn't any power or for any other number of similar applications. Cool. We need a lot more people like you in this world.

            Hank, I compared your dimension on your front strut with mine when I took measurements on my struts. Man those are big dudes at 3.8 inches. Like having an extra wing hanging out there.

            Want to get the dimensions of the Univair ones as all I have so far is that they are "like the original design." Guess I'll just ask on the applicable thread.

            Personally I would prefer ones about the same size as the ones I have.
            Darryl

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: the BIGGEST BADEST STRUTS

              Well I'm embarrassed! (Don't worry, I'm used to it)
              The 3.825" x 1.420" front and 2.383" x .997" rears are the dimensions for the Airframes struts. Mine (on the 41) are 3.125 x 1.21 front and 1.78 x 1 rear.
              Sorry for any confusion. I am also interested in the OLD strut dimensions so we could maybe figure out when the strut sizes changed.
              Hank

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: the BIGGEST BADEST STRUTS

                Hank,
                Now I am embarrassd. I have all the measurments for the Wag Aero Struts and tried to edit my last post but after messing that up. I decided to start over. The original measurments for a set of F19 struts are 3.036 X 1.286 X .49 Wall The Wag aero front struts are 2.67 X 1.44 X .049 wall. The rear is 1.78 X 1.06 X .049 Wall. Both the original and Wag Aero struts are 4130. My thought is the Wag Aero struts should be smaller on the major axis and larger on the minor axis on the front and very close to the same on the rear as my original pre war struts. I am thinking they are close to the same size but may be lighter(depending on the original wall thickness) and stronger than my originals but could be wrong. Also they use 2 part epoxy primer-usually green but will use the off-white if requested.
                Last edited by Buell Powell; 12-05-2007, 00:32.
                Buell Powell TF#476
                1941 BC12-65 NC29748
                1946 Fairchild 24 NC81330

                Comment

                Working...
                X