Jump to content
Isham

SCALE WEIGHING THE CTSW

Recommended Posts

My latest MRA to change the battery requires scaling.  I have done this for other aircraft but never the FD.  Does anyone have any suggestions?  I only have one scale so will need to move it for each wheel weight.

Should I do this with fuel drained from tanks or full fuel?

Main gear fairings removed or installed?

Should I expect, at level, the main gear to be higher or lower than the nose wheel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the luxury of having a set of three scales. If you know anyone who is serious about racing they might have a set you can borrow. I think it would be difficult to get an accurate weight weighing all three point independently. 

Fuel drained will probably give the most accurate weight, but I would probably base my decision on ow much fuel is onboard now, and whether you have the storage for that much fuel. Myself I have plenty of jugs to drain one that is completely full.

I would weigh it with the fairings installed, and AOI onboard. I would remove any extras that you normally carry.

The main gear will definitely weigh more than the nose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to weigh the aircraft after going to the new battery???? That is total insanity. If this is true, that tells me FD has no clue what they are doing. Maybe the individual who mandated this went to public school and can't do basic math. Sorry for the rant but I think that person's village is looking him. I think what it should say is do a weight and balance calculation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like it either but guess it is a requirement.  Tom what is the rule for this?  I could easily weight the removals and new parts.  Should I challenge the requirement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would definately ask to have the language changed to scaling or calculating required. Even just saying "Revise Weight and Balance using methods described in FAA AC 43.13" would be fine. Weighing an aircraft is a relatively lengthy endeavor, requires a hangar with still air, and calibrated scales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like other have said I would request having the wording changed to a new weight and balance must be calculated. I have requested changes in wording before. The worst that can happen is they say no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I requested the change.  After looking over the maintenance manual it basically says to update the equipment list and W&B.  I don't see any requirement for weighing.  I'll let you know what they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FD made the change to the MRA.  "Updating weight and balance according to the applicable maintenance manual is required."  This make it much easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Madhatter said:

Just do a wt and bal calculation and be done with it, playing word games with them is a wast of time.

I don't know why you have such bad experiences with them so often 😛. They've been super accommodating for me on just about everything. Usually, wording mistakes are just stemming from a little bit of sloppiness rather than any kind of malice or kneejerk reaction.

The VG research with OSU is the first time I've ever gotten a flat out "no" from them, but even then, Tom said it would be better to use the R&D category because that's what it's meant for, and he'll provide any information that he's at liberty to in support of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will never approve vg's. They would have perform all flight tests on the CT. We are flying yesterday's CTs,  they are not interested and for good reason, there is no money in changing anything on an SW. They have the F2 and other new one's on the drawing board.  We are flying has been's, that's just the way it works. As far as dealing with them MRA,s are for radios and benign changes, not some of things I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why he won't approve an MRA for them, he flat out said it's not appropriate for all the flight testing that is required as part of the process that I'll have to be doing.

I don't expect much, but he did say, the "no" is not a "fuck off", it's a "You're on your own, we'll do what we can, let us know how it turns out."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...