Moving, pushing pulling your CT

[FastEddieB]

For pulling it into the hanger I think I would make a couple small "L" shaped brackets with holes in them and have them attached to the main landing gear where the axle attaches. You can then use a bridle and hook to both connecting the winch to the bridle.

Easier than brackets might just be a tow strap wrapped around the both gear legs and then hook up to that - looking out for chafing and fairings that might be damaged.

[Tom Baker]

Easier than brackets might just be a tow strap wrapped around the both gear legs and then hook up to that - looking out for chafing and fairings that might be damaged.

I think the straps might want to ride up the leg and into the upper fairing. That it why I said brackets.

[Jim Meade]

The brackets would work quite well. The metric bolt that fits takes a 14mm wrench, whatever bolt size that is. That bracket is where I put one of my GoPro RAM ball mounts.

 

I fly off grass frequently but put on bigger main tires more because the little ones had trouble staying up. There are many threads on that. I like the bigger ones better, as the Desser monster retread wears like iron. There are many threads on this topic. I removed the wheel pants from the mains and left them off. I like to stand on the tire as a step for my particular way of entering the airplane.

[Doug G.]

Tom, I am trying to visualize what you are talking about on my 2010 LS. There is a hole in the gear leg on the back side of the axle, but no bolt. ?

[Philip Welsch]

I attached triangle shaped sheet steel (090) tabs to the inside of the main landing gear legs (facing rearward) for pulling my 2008 CTLS up hill into my hanger. They bolt on using the protruding length of two (each side) of the brake caliper mounting bolts. In my case, the existing mounting bolts were long enough to allow installation of the tab plus additional lockwasher and nut without disturbing the originai retaining nuts - with several bolt threads still exposed. A hole at the rear of each tab allows connection with snap hooks to a -y- shaped cable bridle and then to the winch cable. Works fine and is easily removable for restoration of the aircraft to FD original condition.

 

PRW

[Tom Baker]

Tom, I am trying to visualize what you are talking about on my 2010 LS. There is a hole in the gear leg on the back side of the axle, but no bolt. ?

Kind of like Phillip mentioned. A short piece of angle with 2 holes to capture the 2 lower bolts that hold the axle and wheel pant bracket on, and one hole in the other flat to hook the tow strap. The use something like this for larger tail wheel aircraft to hook up a tow bar.

[Doug G.]

OK, that makes sense. I was trying to figure out the 14mm bolt you mentioned.

[Tom Baker]

OK, that makes sense. I was trying to figure out the 14mm bolt you mentioned.

That was Jim Meade who mentioned the Bolt that takes the 14mm wrench. That set up is on the SW.

[Doug G.]

Thanks, thought that might be the case.

[Anticept]

Just try not to push the prop. The bearings are not designed for that kind of force.

 

I just grab just forward of the verical stabilizertail and tow mine around. Looks funny with the nose in the air and i'm just pulling her around

[Doug G.]

FD says the prop is one of the two places it is OK to push.

[WmInce]

FD says the prop is one of the two places it is OK to push.

 

What's the other place?

[Anticept]

Interesting... I thought i saw in the rotax operators manual a note that it shouldn't be pushed by the prop. IF i find it again, i will post a reference.

[Doug G.]

Evidently my post didn't...restaurant wi-fi.

 

The CTLS POH says pull at the base of the prop (doesn't say push) and push between the "vehicle tail and the wing", or, on the open door frame.

[Doug G.]

It is not easy moving the plane by pushing on a horizontal surface, or is it just as the curve starts up an the vertical stabilizer?

[Anticept]

On flat ground, it is pretty easy to pull the tail. Up a hill, i would recommend pushing on the rear frame of the cabin doors.

[Doug G.]

That is true, but the POH says between the wing and the vertical tail?? And it talks about pushing, not pulling.

[Anticept]

Well you are pushing on the tail at the base of the vertical stabilizer while facing towards the rear. I think that was just a translation issue

[Doug G.]

I agree that pushing there makes sense. Is there a difference between pushing at the propeller root and pulling there as far as the engine is concerned?

[Anticept]

Main bearings are often designed to take force in one direction, and not the other. If you look at the split case of a lycoming, there's a lot of metal forward of the bearings to hold them in place, but thin metal behind it.

 

A lot of people get away with pushing props, but it's still something that I don't really like to see. Since I don't know what the inside of a rotax is, I feel it's better to play it safe than sorry! Maybe I am a little paranoid, but it IS a $20,000 dollar part!

 

There are some engines that support beta mode (negative blade pitch, mostly turboprops) and are designed to run with a backwards force on the bearing while running, and on those, it doesn't bother me too much.

[Doug G.]

Yes, but this is not putting pressure on the crankshaft, but the gearbox, and not much pressure (for me at least - not uphill) so I wonder...time to head to the manuals. Unless someone has asked Rotax about this already. I am not certain the manual will give a definitive answer. Roger?

[Doug G.]

Anyone have a hand tug they aren't using?

[Jim Meade]

Any prop that runs in beta is on an airplane too big to push on.

It's not always useful to recommend actions "just because it makes me comfortable". That may have it's place, like "don't go too near the edge" if one doesn't know if the creek bank has been undercut, but it can serve as a way to keep people from doing perfectly acceptable procedures out of misplaced concern. Aviation is full of examples of inexperienced CFIs instilling bad habits because the CFI doesn't know enough to understand the situation (s)he is uncomfortable with or can't adequately explain. A good example of this is the admonition to not run a constant speed engine "over square". Another is the consternation some mechanics have with running an engine lean of peak. It's always more convincing to see a reference cited, or see the name of the person being quoted.

[Tom Baker]

When pushing or pulling on the propeller on a Rotax no load would be transferred to the crankshaft. All of the load would be on the gearbox. I'm not sure if they do anything different to the gearbox for pusher applications, if they don't it will take the pushing or pulling loads.

[Anticept]

My crankshaft point was a parrallel. I do not know what the rotax gearbox bearings looks like, but i would think such a precision part would not be a good thing to apply forces not designed for, if it is not designed for it. Then again, is there a difference between a pusher and tractor engine and gearbox?

 

Any prop that runs in beta is on an airplane too big to push on.

It's not always useful to recommend actions "just because it makes me comfortable". That may have it's place, like "don't go too near the edge" if one doesn't know if the creek bank has been undercut, but it can serve as a way to keep people from doing perfectly acceptable procedures out of misplaced concern. Aviation is full of examples of inexperienced CFIs instilling bad habits because the CFI doesn't know enough to understand the situation (s)he is uncomfortable with or can't adequately explain. A good example of this is the admonition to not run a constant speed engine "over square". Another is the consternation some mechanics have with running an engine lean of peak. It's always more convincing to see a reference cited, or see the name of the person being quoted.

Not be abe to push on it yourself, yes, but i have seen 6 people push a king air back due to a broken tug.

 

I know where you are coming from, but my counter argument is you might not know the design limits either. It's better safe than sorry.

 

Now, in your example, i show in the poh that i can run over square, then the cfi should not be uncomfortable about it. Then again, maybe owners want to play it safe with their renters too. Asking renters to not run over square could be a form of risk management.