how roll fuselage/engine package

I don't know if you're pulling my leg or not,but..

some reasons a

Running the engine gives a lot of personal satisfaction; debugging the
instrumentation and operating parameters as actually connected to the planes
panel and not on a test stand; something to do while awaiting parts,
whatever; can figure out exhaust and mufflers layout; can figure out cowling
fit; can solve any heating/cooling problems; etc, etc..

Boils down to my project and whatever makes me happy G
"guynoir" wrote in message
...
I still don't understand why you want to break in an engine on a non-flying
aircraft. What's the point? You're going to have to finish putting the
aircraft together anyway, and it will probably be days, weeks or months
between the assembly and actual airworthiness. Why not run the engine
then?

Dick wrote:
Midget Mustang, single seater experimental.

There are 2 other planes crammed into the hanger and having wings
installed is not an option at this time. The builders on the field have
broke-in engines on a fuselage without wings several times previously.
Safety of course is most important. I find builders innovative and some,
basically cheap (myself).
Hence the 2x4 approach. Although my stand has no duct tape, we did race a
formula Vee back in the 60's and sometimes used duct tape for securing
body skin at 95-100 mph..



--
John Kimmel


Naturally, these humorous remarks are all entirely my own opinion, based
solely
on rumor, supposition, innuendo and damned lies, and should be interpreted
in a
spirit of fun. My memory is faulty, also.

Boils down to my project and whatever makes me happy G

See........ Dick is a dick.


"Dick" wrote in message
...
I don't know if you're pulling my leg or not,but..

some reasons a

Running the engine gives a lot of personal satisfaction; debugging the
instrumentation and operating parameters as actually connected to the
planes
panel and not on a test stand; something to do while awaiting parts,
whatever; can figure out exhaust and mufflers layout; can figure out
cowling
fit; can solve any heating/cooling problems; etc, etc..

"guynoir" wrote in message
...
I still don't understand why you want to break in an engine on a
non-flying
aircraft. What's the point? You're going to have to finish putting the
aircraft together anyway, and it will probably be days, weeks or months
between the assembly and actual airworthiness. Why not run the engine
then?

Dick wrote:
Midget Mustang, single seater experimental.

There are 2 other planes crammed into the hanger and having wings
installed is not an option at this time. The builders on the field have
broke-in engines on a fuselage without wings several times previously.
Safety of course is most important. I find builders innovative and
some,
basically cheap (myself).
Hence the 2x4 approach. Although my stand has no duct tape, we did race
a
formula Vee back in the 60's and sometimes used duct tape for securing
body skin at 95-100 mph..



--
John Kimmel


Naturally, these humorous remarks are all entirely my own opinion, based
solely
on rumor, supposition, innuendo and damned lies, and should be
interpreted
in a
spirit of fun. My memory is faulty, also.

Your reasons for running the engine suck. A proper, deliberate and
methodical approach to finishing your aircraft will result in a finished
flying aircraft in the minimum time and with fewest problems. Disasters
like the Skystar incident are rare, but pursuit of instant gratification
is all the invitation needed.

I agree with your reasons for having the engine mounted on the fuselage.
You have already figured out a way to support the fuselage with the
engine on it, since you have the fuselage completed and the engine is
mounted on it. It seems to me that there is no obstacle to your
completing the aircraft. Final debugging can be done with the wings and
landing gear installed, as has been the usual practice for everyone else
who's ever built a midget mustang or mustang 2.

Dick wrote:
I don't know if you're pulling my leg or not,but..

some reasons a

Running the engine gives a lot of personal satisfaction; debugging the
instrumentation and operating parameters as actually connected to the planes
panel and not on a test stand; something to do while awaiting parts,
whatever; can figure out exhaust and mufflers layout; can figure out cowling
fit; can solve any heating/cooling problems; etc, etc..

Boils down to my project and whatever makes me happy G
"guynoir" wrote in message

--
John Kimmel


Naturally, these humorous remarks are all entirely my own opinion, based
solely
on rumor, supposition, innuendo and damned lies, and should be
interpreted in a
spirit of fun. My memory is faulty, also.

I was originally going to suggest making a structure that would bolt to
the ends of the main spar fittings, but that could impart stress on
those fittings that could damage them. The bed/carpet sling idea is
OK, except that you will be running the engine, not just moving the
assembly around. How about making a wood structure that "sandwiches"
the wing stub ( say about a foot outboard of the fuselage sides ) Think
of the "clapboard" that the movie industry uses before each "take" of a
scene. Cut out the shape of the airfoil between (2) 2 x 8's. Hinge
the 2 x 8's on one end and bolt them together on the opposite end.
Then extend a vertical board on the forward end of the structure and
put casters/wheels on the end. You could arrange the casters far
enough forward that you wouldn't have to add weight to the tail with
the wings removed. Make one for each side and maybe secure each
structure to the other one for rigidity. Of course making the whole
thing stout as hell and protect the wing. Might work.

Neal

Neal,
Leaning towards a stub-out wing section with permanent gear mounted. This
allows me to: complete braking system; still fit project alongside my flying
plane; continue folding wing mechanism developement; etc.

Thanks for positive thoughts, Dick
wrote in message
ups.com...
I was originally going to suggest making a structure that would bolt to
the ends of the main spar fittings, but that could impart stress on
those fittings that could damage them. The bed/carpet sling idea is
OK, except that you will be running the engine, not just moving the
assembly around. How about making a wood structure that "sandwiches"
the wing stub ( say about a foot outboard of the fuselage sides ) Think
of the "clapboard" that the movie industry uses before each "take" of a
scene. Cut out the shape of the airfoil between (2) 2 x 8's. Hinge
the 2 x 8's on one end and bolt them together on the opposite end.
Then extend a vertical board on the forward end of the structure and
put casters/wheels on the end. You could arrange the casters far
enough forward that you wouldn't have to add weight to the tail with
the wings removed. Make one for each side and maybe secure each
structure to the other one for rigidity. Of course making the whole
thing stout as hell and protect the wing. Might work.

Neal