Jump to content

A5 crash kills lead designer


Recommended Posts

The Ford "T" wasn't just another car. It actually functioned much better than most of the other offerings in a practical sense and was produced by the most advanced methods of the time of good metals (Vanadium steel alloys) and CHEAP enough for almost anyone to afford. It relegated the motorcycle to the enthusiasts only brigade in the USA as it was cheaper than most of the "top " models of the US motorcycles. The BB V8 was a single ONE piece cast cylinder block, introduced around 1932. A masterpiece of foundry technique at the time. The "T" Model ran through till 1927, then the "A" the "B" and the optional mode V8 which configuration became a FORD mainstay.My appreciation of the design of the T came later in life for me as I tended to go for sophisticated design whether it went well or not. ( Really did the job). You could dismantle 4 T models and rearrange the bits and reassemble them and they would run satisfactorily.. This is by maintaining close TOLERENCES with good quality control of mass produced parts. Many others were hand fitted with no real interchangeability without individual fitting and adjustment to get alignment and running clearances correct. Henry put his workers salaries up in the late teens much to the chagrin of the other automakers. His reply to criticism was allegedly along the lines of " If I don't pay my workers a decent salary how would they be able to buy my cars? He wasn't perfect, having been credited with turning machine guns on striking workers, one time. It's interesting to note the "T" motor was used in the Original Pietenpol "air Camper", the block lightened by chiselling some weight from an already fairly light cylinder block. Nev

The model T engine was really interesting in that it ran on a variety of fuels. In the 1980s when all the hype of "multifuel engines" came to Australia it made me laugh somewhat. What they meant by multifuel at the time was that it ran on (a) petrol; and (b) LPG. On the other hand, the Model T engine was a true multifuel engine. It could run on gasoline, alcohol as well as on kerosene and heating oil. Before fuels were properly standardised in the United States, it was a very versatile engine to have.

 

The only problem with putting the engine in aircraft was that it did not have a lot of power. Most of the time, when power was measured it was around the 18-22 hp range. I think this would have barely lifted the Pietenpol off the ground. A second problem is that the fuel burn was pretty high, similar to the fuel burn of today's 80 hp Rotax. The third problem is that the T motor relied on the thermosyphon effect to circulate water in the cooling system, that is, it had no water pump. On a sizzling summer's day, after a lengthy hill climb, many Model Ts ran very hot. I would hazard a guess that putting a Model T engine in an aircraft would have led to overheating problems unless an oversized radiator was used along with a water pump.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Give them a go

Any personal feelings good or bad about the company or model either way is moot,

 

... the MATH ain't there!

 

You can't spend a $100 on an item for a return of $50.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ford "T" engine. It's easy to tune. (if power is a problem) within limits. It has lots of torque so will spin a large prop at slow revs. This gives THRUST which will pull a draggy plane with large wing area at low speeds. Fighter A/C in WW1 only had 90 hp but would climb fast with a big dia. prop. Thermo- syphon works OK when things are clean. Usually the radiator cores were honeycomb and clog easily. The motor has good sized valves and ports. Over 4:1 compression ratio was the practical limit before tetra ethyl lead came along mainly for aero engines in the mid 20's so side valves were still used for racing even though 4 valves /cylinder were around for 10 years. They were used because of poor valve metallurgy to keep the valves with smaller head diameter and less warpage/ distortion /cratering.. Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Any personal feelings good or bad about the company or model either way is moot,... the MATH ain't there!

 

You can't spend a $100 on an item for a return of $50.[/quote

 

Early days yet have some faith it will be hard after this tragedy but hopefully will be overcome I wish them a well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
A Pietenpol built by Pietenpol himself is still flying and at Serpentine WA. It is still using a Ford A engine and flys very well with no apparent lack of power as suggested previously.It flew into one of the Langley Park fly ins.

For more info. http://www.tavas.com.au/resources/Cxcdfrt98711.pdf

 

Cheers

I believe it was once flown by Bob Hoover when he was here.

rgmwa

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again I am moved to give Facthunter a great big pat on the back for he has mentioned the elephant in the room regarding Henry Ford. "Henry put his workers salaries up in the late teens much to the chagrin of the other automakers. His reply to criticism was allegedly along the lines of " If I don't pay my workers a decent salary how would they be able to buy my cars?"

 

However good things don't last and I remember that he later employed armed troop from the National Guard to violently brea k a strike at his plant. Things always can be depended on to go from good to bad to worse I suppose.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
However good things don't last and I remember that he later employed armed troop from the National Guard

The impression of Henry Ford very much depends on who wrote the article at the time, or even now.

 

A hero to me, a villian to others.

 

"The Battle Of The Overpass" was one of the main turning points for Ford. Of course it was a 'dramatic incident' reported without all the facts leading up to it.

 

Battle of the Overpass - Wikipedia

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
...It's interesting to note the "T" motor was used in the Original Pietenpol "air Camper", the block lightened by chiselling some weight from an already fairly light cylinder block. Nev

 

A Pietenpol built by Pietenpol himself is still flying and at Serpentine WA. It is still using a Ford A engine and flys very well with no apparent lack of power as suggested previously.It flew into one of the Langley Park fly ins.

For more info. http://www.tavas.com.au/resources/Cxcdfrt98711.pdf

 

Cheers

That makes a lot more sense!

 

The Model A engine (around 40 horsepower) had around twice as much power as the engine from the Model T (somewhere between 18 and 22 horsepower).

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link Bex. It seems pretty clear from this brief account that the Ford boys definitely did the wrong thing and then tried to cover it up. Management can be aggressively dangerous to workers and (of course) labor sometimes get out of control. Nothing to see here...move on! Hehehehe. No offense meant Don:wave:

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the link Bex. It seems pretty clear from this brief account that the Ford boys definitely did the wrong thing and then tried to cover it up. Management can be aggressively dangerous to workers and (of course) labor sometimes get out of control. Nothing to see here...move on! Hehehehe. No offense meant Don:wave:

Nothing helps like taking the workers outback for a weekly whipping until moral improves.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some hotted up "T"s run the "A" crank as it's got bigger diameter journals, and machine the block to suit. I'm not sure what was originally fitted. to the Piet. It depends on the date of build. The A wasn't made until 1928. There was plenty of variations of the T as used for competition. Even OHV conversion as was also available as a modification for the Henderson Motorcycle engine of four in line specially for aircraft. but AIR cooled and smaller displacement. I'm not suggesting the OHV was used for the Piet ever but there's other ways of getting more power. Till Tetraethyl lead was available, 4;1 was about all the compression the fuel could stand without destructive detonation happening. Ricardo and a few others were developing squish combustion chambers for SV engines. Harley Davidson paid for Patented designs by Ricardo at about that time, where and when they were incorporated in their engines Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Some hotted up "T"s run the "A" crank as it's got bigger diameter journals, and machine the block to suit. I'm not sure what was originally fitted. to the Piet. It depends on the date of build. The A wasn't made until 1928. There was plenty of variations of the T as used for competition. Even OHV conversion as was also available as a modification for the Henderson Motorcycle engine of four in line specially for aircraft. but AIR cooled and smaller displacement. I'm not suggesting the OHV was used for the Piet ever but there's other ways of getting more power. Till Tetraethyl lead was available, 4;1 was about all the compression the fuel could stand without destructive detonation happening. Ricardo and a few others were developing squish combustion chambers for SV engines. Harley Davidson paid for Patented designs by Ricardo at about that time, where and when they were incorporated in their engines Nev

This is a relatively new build.

IMG_0082.JPG.a416c3026d5509a504630433577587dc.JPG

 

IMG_0083.JPG.f5bbdfdd4ae4fc66ce84baaa9687707b.JPG

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

At the time , I wonder who would get an almost brand new engine at considerable cost when there are literally millions of the previous model available about for almost nothing. Most people chiselled a lot of weight off the block and anywhere else they thought they could get away with it. I don't think standard power output is the criteria. I doubt few engines would be as supplied by the maker. anymore than the popular Chev Corvair is. Nev

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Too smooth? Hard to see how close to the surface you are.

On glass water landings - you set up with a 150ft rate of decent and wait for the hit on water, safe, simple and effective

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On glass water landings - you set up with a 150ft rate of decent and wait for the hit on water, safe, simple and effective

or you put car reversing distance warning on your plane somewhere and have it call off from about 1.5 meters. It is 2017.

 

This one in my Mazda usually starts at about 1.2 to 1.4 meters, but wasn't playing the game when I recorded this. It started at 1.0 meter and when it gets to 0.3 meters it screams "Stop car, Stop car" ("ting che, ting che!) and red light flashes.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6hgdjRfvm4

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
or you put car reversing distance warning on your plane somewhere and have it call off from about 1.5 meters. It is 2017.This one in my Mazda usually starts at about 1.2 to 1.4 meters, but wasn't playing the game when I recorded this. It started at 1.0 meter and when it gets to 0.3 meters it screams "Stop car, Stop car" ("ting che, ting che!) and red light flashes.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6hgdjRfvm4

These devices do not rain: it confuses them 006_laugh.gif.0f7b82c13a0ec29502c5fb56c616f069.gif.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...