Suzuki G13 engine proportions?

[rtfm]

Hi,
I'm designing a pusher gyro to be powered by the G13B. Problem is, I need to know by how much the drive shaft is offset vertically from the base of the engine (excluding oil pan). If I know this, then I can accurately position the horisontal engine mount.

I don't have ready access to an engine at the moment, so I'm stuck till I can get someone to measure their engine for me.

Help?

I've posted a working sketch of the project. It might help you understand my problem.


Regards,
Duncan

[thirdy8special]

Check raven redrives or spg redrives for info.

[Vance]

Interesting tail design Duncan. Would you please expand on your thinking.

Thank you, Vance

[rtfm]

Hi,
First, sorry about the size of the graphic. I tried to post a nice little thumbnail which would exand when you click on it, but couldn't work out how to do it.

There is quite a lot about the RTFM "Razorback" which is a bit unusual, but nothing which is revolutionary. At least, everything has been tried successfully before.

Most striking, I guess, is the overhead tail boom. The reason is simply to give more ground clearance. There is no pressing reason why the tail boom should be joined at the bottom of the mast. It is done this way largely, I suspect, because it has always been done that way, and mounting it overhead is visually striking also.

Regards,
Duncan

[Vance]

Hello Duncan, Thank you for your thinking on the tail boom. I was wondering about your thinking on the tail group. It looks like the horizontal stabilizer is an inverted V and all the tail surfaces have control surfaces. This is unusual.

Thank you, Vance

[rtfm]

Hi,
Ah, yes. There are two pressing reasons for this configuration.

Tail feathers need to consist of both a vertical fin/rudder and a horisontal stabiliser. The "normal" arrangement would mean that the vertical fin/rudder would protrude too high, making a possible rotor strike easier. However, by using the inverted "V" arrangement, I can substantially reduce the height of the vertical fin since half the "V" area is actually acting in the vertical plane. And all this usable area is BELOW the tail boom. However, not too far below it, since we also have to worry about ground clearance, especially in the landing configuration. Simply extending the vertical fin downwards would place it too close to the ground. However, a 45 degree inverted "V" gives both the necessary vertical and the horisontal area, without encroaching on either the top or the bottom limits.

The Razorback rotor will also have no fore/aft control movement. All vertical control will come from the control surfaces on the horisontal stabs. This provides two huge benefits. First, it makes accidental rotor strikes impossible, since the rotor plane can't tilt backwards. All I have to do is to ensure that the flapping angle is less than the angle between the rotor head and the tail. Second, PIO is almost impossible, since there is no control lag induced by the rotor. Direct control of the elevators will ensure an extremely stable flight.

And finally, I think it looks sexy.

Regards,
Duncan

[Vance]

Thank you Duncan. That is very creative. I find the inverted V tail particularly interesting in it's responce to roll.

I know Ron Heron experimented with that sort of rotor control on the Little Wing.

I will look foward to following your progress. Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts.

Thank you, Vance