Condor undercarriage

H Stuart · Post by **H Stuart** » Sun Nov 13, 2011 10:53 pm

Hi,
Anyone got either a pair of Condor U/C legs or parts or the teardrop pistons. My Condor is a bit duck toed so I am ussuming this is the cause. I'm new to the Condor so any advice much appreciated.

ThePipster · Post by **ThePipster** » Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:42 pm

Hi Stuart,

Speak to Pete Smoothy at Airworld UK, he seems to know alot about that type of undercarriage leg.

Phil

Jim Alex · Post by **Jim Alex** » Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:27 pm

If you mean "toed-in" they were built that way.

H Stuart · Post by **H Stuart** » Tue Nov 15, 2011 8:15 pm

Hi,
Thanks The, I'll give Pete a ring and see whats available.

Ive heard that Jim and it makes sence to have some toe-in to counteract the legs splaying out on impact, but this on mine seems a little more than ideal. I have a friend who has the 62c and his looks much straighter and seems easier to pull around.

H Stuart · Post by **H Stuart** » Tue Nov 15, 2011 8:17 pm

Woops,
Sorry Phil, didn't notice your signature at the bottom.

Gaznav · Post by **Gaznav** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:37 pm

My Condor has a few degrees of toe out and it should be like that!

Read here why toe-out is required... http://www.eaahighriver.org/Newsletters ... 0_NEWS.pdf

Gaznav · Post by **Gaznav** » Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:43 pm

PS. Here's an article from Pilot Mag and it describes the "toe out" on the last page. I suggest you don't modify the toe out to neutral as this would be a modification and LAA Eng will have a fit!

http://www.janestevens.co.uk/rollason/p ... 20Test.PDF

Happy flightings!

H Stuart · Post by **H Stuart** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 12:13 am

Hi Gary,
That's very interesting and I have experienced the handling mentioned in the second article but not in a scary way (as P2 only).
My aircraft has a layout as per Fig.3 in the article (Toe in) and what the writer describes makes perfect sense.
However, the parts manual I have describes toe-in of 0"to 1/4" of toe in from the front of the tyres.
I have just thought again about this and my understanding of this less than obvious description is that if you measure the distance between the 2 stub axles centres, then measure the distance between the 2 font tyre tangents at the tread centre, then there should be a total difference in the dimension by -1/2".
The description does say see fig 3 but this does not show the meaning on my copy.
Other condor owners seem to also report that 'toe-in' is correct.
But as you show, the purchasing article you included does describe toe-out.
I'll have a look at the set up relative to the delta-1/2" interpretation.
(made some copies of the pages but no idea how to attach)

New to the site and only had the Condor 8 months and not flown in it much so still getting an understanding for the type and its history.

See if this works !
https://picasaweb.google.com/1130157865 ... directlink

Yeah. the boys a genious

Gaznav · Post by **Gaznav** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 9:58 pm

Stuart

You've had me thinking a bit harder and I wonder if the Parts Manual is suggesting the measurement with the aircraft jacked up? As I would expect the wheels to start to splay under load. The manual mentions jacking up the aircraft and then doing a bunch of items and measurements, but at no point does it say put it on the ground again. If we measured the toe-in or toe-out on the ground then I suspect it would need to include the extra weight of all the "optional extras" (fuel, oil, engine ancilliaries, battery, instrumentation, avionics, etc...). Therefore, I suspect the measurement is done jacked up?

Anyway, my Condor definately looks toe-out to me (and the tyres scrub on tarmac/concrete) and she always has. Also, others I have seen (D62b and D62c) have always been toe-out.

Have you tried LAA Engineering for an answer? A word of warning, though, no 2 Condors seem ever the same - different wing-tips, gear length, firewall configurations even fuselage lengths.

Please post what you find as I would be most interested - also thanks for the pictures. We're trying to track down our parts manual at the moment!

All the best

H Stuart · Post by **H Stuart** » Mon Nov 21, 2011 11:25 pm

I had a bit more think about the difference toe in or toe out would feel.
The Condor undercarriage has a lot of rake angle when viewed from the side so if landed on 3 points apparent toe out would become outward camber. Apparent toe in would become inward camber.
Neither would give much steer effect.
but a high tail landing or take off would generate more and more steer as the tail got higher and the rake angle decreases.
So either way, 3 point landings seems the safest approach and I noticed that was mentioned in the buyers guide you posted.
I added a doodle to the link to hopefuly show what I mean.

https://picasaweb.google.com/1130157865 ... directlink

Gaznav · Post by **Gaznav** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 7:10 am

Harry (apologies for calling you Stuart earlier!)

Yes, I always land via a 3-pointer in the Condor. The guy who taught me, who has been instructing on her for years, told me this. I also tend to use grass as the tyres wear out very quickly on tarmac/concrete landings - that said, with the wide track undercarriage she is a pussycat on hard surfaces compared to the Kitfox taildragger I had before!

All the best

Nigel Hitchman · Post by **Nigel Hitchman** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:58 pm

There is a guy named Michael Peare or very similar, he used to have a Condor flying club at Redhill and owned quite a few of them, wonder if he could give you some good ideas.
He seems to do instructing in lots of different countries, so not sure where you might find him, maybe a google search or someone else here knows him. He turned up at Hinton in the summer with someone and said he was just back from Instructing in Thailand, but before that I know he was in Vancouver.

Rich Valler · Post by **Rich Valler** » Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:38 pm

Said gentlemen is a frequent poster on the Flyer mag Forum, posting as MichaelP

H Stuart · Post by **H Stuart** » Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:27 am

Logically, at the end of the day, the correct setting is as per the manufacturers shop manual and any published updates.
By Standard practice, if it aint broke, don't fix it seems to prevail with aircraft.
In This case this doesn't seem to be a safety related issue when taking into account the many varied set ups in current use. But it could be a case of performance or wear / cost efficiency with respect to minimum ground roll and tyre life.
Carrying out any adjustments is where the care and due diligence is essential of course.
Must say mind, its a cracking plane and I'm looking forward to many years of puddle hopping ! and general flying fun.
thanks for all the advice. Very interesting and helpful.
Harry.........

Bill McCarthy · Post by **Bill McCarthy** » Wed Nov 23, 2011 1:05 pm

I learned to fly Condors at Rochester in '76 and a Jodel 1050 at Hucknall and was informed by the instructors that "toe out" was set, purely to inhibit ground loop which the 1050 had a propensity to do if not prepared for it.