Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp
Exactly!
You have an airframe designed for one engine that is now having to work with another one.
This is why STC's are required and you just cannot swap motors in certified design airplanes.
The merlin prop swung at a lower rpm, weight is different, and the thrustline was higher. At least it turned in the same direction.
You do understand airframe are built to counteract the effects of spiral slipstream and torque?
That is why engine mounts/firewalls are angled and verticle stabilizers angled.
Mounting an engine with different properties results in different handling qualities.
Why are we even discussing this and what does it have to do with effect of the slats?
Is it just your justification for using an example which has nothing to do with the original topic?
|
The point is the aircraft had slats, the same ones on the 109, the same ones you claim could not result in a spin, the same airframe from Mark Hannas quote you were more than happy to include to reflect the 109's behaviour, you do this all the time, completely contradict yourself.
are you really saying that the Spanish simply 'nailed' a merlin into the aircraft and thought 'to hell with the consequences'?
and how much did the basic 109 airframe design change through development when they used RR kestrel engines and Jumo's?