Rebel "652" Wing tanks

bjohnson · Post by **bjohnson** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:27 pm

Thanks Guys for all the replies. This really just convinced me to go with my gut feeling and stick with the original designed "wet wing". I hope that this is just the description and not the result-Ha! ha!. One more question and that is in regarding firewall placement with the "O320". I will gladly build it the suggested (3" back) as the instructions indicate, but I know there are Rebels out there at the original position supporting this power plant-What are your thoughts-(I'm probably about 4/6 weeks from starting the fuselage)-Thanks again-Bob

Bob Patterson · Post by **Bob Patterson** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:27 pm

Let's back up a bit .... Are you absolutely sure you want to use the
O-320 ?? Why ??? You really have to think about the kind of flying
you will be doing - and how much all that fuel will cost over the next
20 or 30 years ! ;-) The upgrade can always be done later, although
it IS a big job - it starts at the front of the door posts ! There
are at least 3 Rebels here that have flown happily for years, with
O-235's, then been upgraded.

I'm already on record as not liking the O-320 Rebel from a pilot
position - it moves you back 3", your feet, your seat, and your EYES !!
The visibility and overall feel of flying the aircraft is COMPLETELY
different ! <I> like sitting up front, with lots of sky visible -
old glider pilot thing ! :-) If you've never flown anything else, it
likely isn't a problem ... the Rebel is still "The Best floatplane in the
world !" (TM) :-) You will find that you will NEED to install at
least the overhead skylights, so you can see out in turns ! With the
standard firewall position, the windshield and the small oval skylights
are enough for a good lookout... the extras are really nice, though.

The Rebels that didn't have the firewall moved were very early ones,
before the factory had done the mods. themselves. If the C of G is very
far forward, you do not get the same feel or performance from the aircraft.
It will be harder to land well, and cruise will definitely be slower...
If the CofG is moved back, you still have the extra load on the mounts,
firewall, and fuse sides - although the floatfix mods & the firewall
beefups should help considerably with that ...

Keith Kinden did the first O-320, not moved - are you here, Keith ???
Any helpful comments ???

.....bobp

-----------------------------orig.-------------------------------------------
At 12:43 PM 12/1/99 -0500, you wrote:

Thanks Guys for all the replies. This really just convinced me to go with

my gut feeling and stick with the original designed "wet wing". I hope that
this is just the description and not the result-Ha! ha!. One more question
and that is in regarding firewall placement with the "O320". I will gladly
build it the suggested (3" back) as the instructions indicate, but I know
there are Rebels out there at the original position supporting this power
plant-What are your thoughts-(I'm probably about 4/6 weeks from starting
the fuselage)-Thanks again-Bob

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Thanks Guys for all the replies. This really
just convinced me to go with my gut feeling and stick with the original

designed

"wet wing". I hope that this is just the description and not the
result-Ha! ha!. One more question and that is in regarding firewall placement
with the "O320". I will gladly build it the suggested (3" back)
as the instructions  indicate, but I know there are Rebels out there

at the

original position supporting this power plant-What are your thoughts-(I'm
probably about  4/6 weeks from starting the fuselage)-Thanks
again-Bob</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Wayne G. O'Shea · Post by **Wayne G. O'Shea** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:27 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your following message has been delivered to the 134 members of
the list murphy-rebel@dcsol.com at 20:31:11 on 1 Dec 1999.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bob, Bob and ALL,
Three O-320 Rebels now and you still couldn't get me to move the firewall!
Like Bob P. says everything gets moved back 3 inches except the cabin around
you! Radios no longer fit the panel(the original firewall position only
leaves 1/4" on a KLX135 comm/gps), the windshield will now overhang the
engine compartment, rudder pedals move back, thus you sit 3" further back,
stick no longer in comfortable spot if left on the carrythru, etc. etc. If
it comes out a little nose heavy, it just means that the more your throw in
the back, the better it flys and you don't have to worry about exceeding the
aft CofG.

To give you ideas of weights and balances:

Howard's O-320-E2D rebel with full gyro panel, 32lb McCauley prop etc
weighed out at 950lb( when unpainted and on wheels) and empty C of G 9.7" in
aft of datum. Battery located in tail in front of 3rd bulkhead back from
float point, fiberglass tail spring and Scott 3200 tailwheel.

My Rebel O-320-C2A (same as B1) with full gyro panel, warp drive prop, Gill
25 Battery (still) on the firewall lengthwise, alum. flaperons and 16lb of
counterbalance, 4 upholstered seats, wheel pants, 3 leaf steel tail spring
and Scott 3200 tailwheel just weighed in at 996 lb(painted), empty C of G
10.42" aft of datum.

Rebel I just rebuilt O-320-E2D, Full gyro panel, 40 lb Sensenich Propellor,
battery just behind float point bulkhead, fiberglass tail spring and Maule
tailwheel weighed out at 966lb (unpainted) and empty C of G 8.16" aft of
datum.

All 3 aircraft when piloted and fueled, fit pretty much into Murphy's new
preferred operating C of G (the very forward part of it anyway)

The closest 2, to compare, are Howards and the rebuild as they only weighed
out 16 lbs different and the first obvious difference is 8 lbs for the
propellors. Next is the tailwheel, Maule about 3 lbs lighter than the Scott.
This puts them within 5 lbs of each other but C of G 1.6" different. If I
moved the Battery back to the matching location as Howards this would make
them almost identical. And yes, you can really feel the difference flying
the Rebuild at low fuel weights compared to flying mine with the 10.42 empty
C of G. Stalls quicker and less elevator authority(I can still land it
tailwheel first though), but nothing that is going to take you by surprise.

This Nose Heavy C of G is easy to get rid of by loading your aircraft
baggage compartment with all the stuff you need to survive at Oshkosh for a
week(or your winter survival kit and snowshoes this time of year(I know you
don't get snow in California)) or simply putting the Battery further back,
putting a steel tail spring and heavy tailwheel on. Every 5 lbs at the tail
spring area will move the empty C of G back approximately 1". If I removed
30 lbs from the nose, by putting a Warp Drive Prop on, this aircrafts C of G
would be absolutely perfect.(but I really prefer the performance of this new
74X56 Sensenich Prop!)

I can't make the decision for you, I can only offer past experiences and
knowledge! By the way, anyone telling you that their O-320 Rebel weighs less
than 900lbs even with a sparse panel and bare interior, weighed their plane
on "broken" scales so they could "legally" carry the extra weight they know
it can!(or left some parts out of the plane)

By the way the tail spring I mentioned(since there has been a lot of talk
about them), is available at CANADIAN TIRE! 3 leaf utility trailer spring, 1
3/4" wide(just like we need), approx. $32, cut the curls off both ends,
double spring area bolted to tailwheel. 3rd reinforcing leaf area centered
between wheel and post, double spring area under post clamps(same thickness
as original aluminum one) and single leaf area bolted to tail cone attach
bracket. Adjust tail wheel trailing angle to liking with spacer at attach
bolt. (I haven't managed to make this steel one go up through my rudder yet,
but I did it with both the aluminum one and the fiberglass one)

Anyone tired of my babbling yet? My Wife wants me to get some work done
around here, so see you later!

Blue skies, Wayne

P.S. I only went to 150 HP because I was tired of getting stuck in wet snow
on wheel penetration skis.(but I can sure get used to this 2100FPM climb(at
1350lbs) on wheels) A 118HP O-235 would be just fine if you are only
planning to fly wheels. If you change your mind later and switch to an
O-320, by then there will be a market for all of our old O-235's as the kit
industry has realized there is now a surplus of them and are building kits
such as the RV-9 to use these lower powered engines!

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Patterson <bob.patterson@canrem.com>
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List <murphy-rebel@dcsol.com>
Date: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 7:04 PM
Subject: Re: Rebel "652" Wing tanks

Let's back up a bit .... Are you absolutely sure you want to use the
O-320 ?? Why ??? You really have to think about the kind of flying
you will be doing - and how much all that fuel will cost over the next
20 or 30 years ! ;-) The upgrade can always be done later, although
it IS a big job - it starts at the front of the door posts ! There
are at least 3 Rebels here that have flown happily for years, with
O-235's, then been upgraded.

I'm already on record as not liking the O-320 Rebel from a pilot
position - it moves you back 3", your feet, your seat, and your EYES !!
The visibility and overall feel of flying the aircraft is COMPLETELY
different ! <I> like sitting up front, with lots of sky visible -
old glider pilot thing ! :-) If you've never flown anything else, it
likely isn't a problem ... the Rebel is still "The Best floatplane in the
world !" (TM) :-) You will find that you will NEED to install at
least the overhead skylights, so you can see out in turns ! With the
standard firewall position, the windshield and the small oval skylights
are enough for a good lookout... the extras are really nice, though.

The Rebels that didn't have the firewall moved were very early ones,
before the factory had done the mods. themselves. If the C of G is very
far forward, you do not get the same feel or performance from the aircraft.
It will be harder to land well, and cruise will definitely be slower...
If the CofG is moved back, you still have the extra load on the mounts,
firewall, and fuse sides - although the floatfix mods & the firewall
beefups should help considerably with that ...

Keith Kinden did the first O-320, not moved - are you here, Keith ???
Any helpful comments ???

.....bobp

-----------------------------orig.-----------------------------------------

--

At 12:43 PM 12/1/99 -0500, you wrote:
Thanks Guys for all the replies. This really just convinced me to go with
my gut feeling and stick with the original designed "wet wing". I hope that
this is just the description and not the result-Ha! ha!. One more question
and that is in regarding firewall placement with the "O320". I will gladly
build it the suggested (3" back) as the instructions indicate, but I know
there are Rebels out there at the original position supporting this power
plant-What are your thoughts-(I'm probably about 4/6 weeks from starting
the fuselage)-Thanks again-Bob
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Thanks Guys for all the replies. This

really

just convinced me to go with my gut feeling and stick with the original
designed
"wet wing". I hope that this is just the description and not the
result-Ha! ha!. One more question and that is in regarding firewall

placement

with the "O320". I will gladly build it the suggested (3"

back)

as the instructions  indicate, but I know there are Rebels out there
at the
original position supporting this power plant-What are your thoughts-(I'm
probably about  4/6 weeks from starting the fuselage)-Thanks
again-Bob</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

klehman · Post by **klehman** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:38 pm

Bob
Just to add more confusion.... At the 1998 OSK builder's dinner, Daryl Murphy
said that he thought all Rebels, regardless of engine, should have the firewall
moved back. I am not delighted with the moved back seat position, but I did it
anyway, partly as I expect the 1800 amphib floats to slightly pull the C of G
forward. I think my Subaru weight and c of g is going to be very close to an
0-320.
The mod also pulls the instrument panel back to maintain instrument space behind
it.
Ken

Bob Johnson wrote:

One more question and that

is in regarding firewall placement with the "O320". I will gladly build it the
suggested (3" back) as the instructions indicate, but I know there are Rebels
out there at the original position supporting this power plant-What are your
thoughts-(I'm probably about 4/6 weeks from starting the fuselage)-Thanks
again-Bob

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Wayne G. O'Shea · Post by **Wayne G. O'Shea** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:38 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your following message has been delivered to the 134 members of
the list murphy-rebel@dcsol.com at 13:18:09 on 2 Dec 1999.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ken, to give you the float numbers so you know what you will be working
with!

Howards 1800 Amphib floats c/w all spreaders and mounting struts, cables,
pulleys etc. weigh in at 258lbs. Their C of G was 10.72" aft of datum! So if
your wheel C of G is forward of this number, the floats move the C of G back
as your remove 60.5 lb of main gear at 0.0" and add this 258 lb at
10.72".(and also remove your tailwheel weight at approx. 197") If your C of
G wheels is behind 10.72 the floats will move it forward some.(but almost
insignificant, Howards moved aft 0.04")

Wayne

-----Original Message-----
From: klehman@albedo.net <klehman@albedo.net>
To: (Murphy Rebel Builders List) <murphy-rebel@dcsol.com>
Date: Thursday, December 02, 1999 9:31 AM
Subject: Re: Rebel "652" Wing tanks

Bob
Just to add more confusion.... At the 1998 OSK builder's dinner, Daryl

Murphy

said that he thought all Rebels, regardless of engine, should have the

firewall

moved back. I am not delighted with the moved back seat position, but I did

it

anyway, partly as I expect the 1800 amphib floats to slightly pull the C of

G

forward. I think my Subaru weight and c of g is going to be very close to

an

0-320.
The mod also pulls the instrument panel back to maintain instrument space

behind

it.
Ken

Bob Johnson wrote:
One more question and that
is in regarding firewall placement with the "O320". I will gladly build

it the

suggested (3" back) as the instructions indicate, but I know there are

Rebels

out there at the original position supporting this power plant-What are

your

thoughts-(I'm probably about 4/6 weeks from starting the

fuselage)-Thanks

again-Bob
*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Bob Patterson · Post by **Bob Patterson** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:39 pm

Ken, to confuse things further ...

The Rebel that Wayne is talking about, that he just finished
rebuilding, without moving the firewall, was originally powered by a
modified Formula Power Subaru Legacy. As far as I know, it flew very nicely
in that configuration, on wheels and straight floats ....
(until the floats - NOT Murphy floats - soaked up a little too much water !)
:-(

.....bobp

<I> would worry about the forward fuse side walls, and the firewall,
and the top panel on the instrument panel, if that heavy engine were not
moved back, though ....

(and everybody wonders WHY I really like that 158 lb Rotax 912-S !! ;-) )
====== (Great Big Grin !)

-------------------------------orig.--------------------------------------
At 09:13 AM 12/2/99 -0500, you wrote:

Bob
Just to add more confusion.... At the 1998 OSK builder's dinner, Daryl Murphy
said that he thought all Rebels, regardless of engine, should have the firewall
moved back. I am not delighted with the moved back seat position, but I did it
anyway, partly as I expect the 1800 amphib floats to slightly pull the C of G
forward. I think my Subaru weight and c of g is going to be very close to an
0-320.
The mod also pulls the instrument panel back to maintain instrument space

behind

it.
Ken

Bob Johnson wrote:
One more question and that
is in regarding firewall placement with the "O320". I will gladly build

it the

suggested (3" back) as the instructions indicate, but I know there are

Rebels

out there at the original position supporting this power plant-What are your
thoughts-(I'm probably about 4/6 weeks from starting the fuselage)-Thanks
again-Bob
*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Wayne G. O'Shea · Post by **Wayne G. O'Shea** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:39 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your following message has been delivered to the 134 members of
the list murphy-rebel@dcsol.com at 23:00:25 on 3 Dec 1999.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bob P.,
Yes all 3, O-320 Rebels, in my hanger have the firewall in the original
position and my firewall mods! The only fuselage side mods are the stringer
piece along the "bath tub" fitting doubler, between the firewall and the
side walls witches hat and the double staggered row of rivets up the door
post that I initiated in 1996. Seems to do the trick! You could do like
Allister and use a piece of channel under the "bath tub" fitting back to the
witches hat.(very similar to a Cessna) If any one has ever looked at a
180/182 Cessna firewall you would be amazed at how little is holding the
motor on! The "bath tub" fittings alone are less than half as big and/or
thick!(holding 230-300HP from ripping off the front!) and are held onto the
side wall channel with 8-5/32" solid rivets.

The 12 or so inches aft of datum for the C of G is a SUGGESTED OPERATING
RANGE(for best cruise etc.), not the Empty C of G. Based on the airfoil
design, the most forward C of G is 7.7" aft of datum. And as previously
noted the rebuilt Rebel I just did has a Empty CofG 8.16" AOD and I can land
it tail wheel first with the mains 3 feet off the ground!

As for the elevator, yes you need at least 27-30 degrees up elevator. After
you have flown the plane for 25 hours or so, be sure to re-tighten the
elevator cables or you will be losing around 10 degrees of elevator, due to
the air pressure forcing the elevator down while taking the slack out of the
cables.

Blue Skies, Wayne

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Patterson <bob.patterson@canrem.com>
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List <murphy-rebel@dcsol.com>
Date: Friday, December 03, 1999 9:46 PM
Subject: Re: Rebel "652" Wing tanks

Thanks for the useful info, Wayne - a wealth of experience again !

Interesting !! I didn't realize - are you saying that all 3 Rebels have
the firewall in the "normal" position, and your firewall mods ??? If so,

that

is QUITE a recommendation for the mods, as there is all that extra arm at
work there ... I guess you added something to the fuse side panels,
as well ???

I recall that Murphy now suggests about 12" aft of datum as the

forward

limit - this is a LONG way from the old (I think) 7 1/2" !! Have flown a

few

Rebels with very far forward CofG's - no big problem, as long as you knew
what to expect. There certainly wasn't a problem with Howard's (other than
those @##$$% electric flaps :-( ) .... although it DID need a little
extra speed or power to get a good flair on floats. A little extra baggage
would have fixed THAT !

(Sorry Curt, but that WAS an example of a BAD electric flap

installation

(IMHO only ....) ! There seem to be many more BAD ones than good ones
like yours .... )

The lightest O-320 rebel I've heard of was 906 lb., painted, on
wheels ... They seem to run in the 930 - 960 range, usually.

A reminder to all - no matter where your firewall is, be SURE you
have AT LEAST 27 degrees of UP elevator travel before flying ! Don't
worry if this leaves less than 25 down ....
......bobp

-----------------------------orig.-----------------------------------------

--

At 08:30 PM 12/1/99 -0500, you wrote:
Bob, Bob and ALL,
Three O-320 Rebels now and you still couldn't get me to move the firewall!
Like Bob P. says everything gets moved back 3 inches except the cabin

around

you! Radios no longer fit the panel(the original firewall position only
leaves 1/4" on a KLX135 comm/gps), the windshield will now overhang the
engine compartment, rudder pedals move back, thus you sit 3" further back,
stick no longer in comfortable spot if left on the carrythru, etc. etc. If
it comes out a little nose heavy, it just means that the more your throw

in

the back, the better it flys and you don't have to worry about exceeding

the

aft CofG.

To give you ideas of weights and balances:

Howard's O-320-E2D rebel with full gyro panel, 32lb McCauley prop etc
weighed out at 950lb( when unpainted and on wheels) and empty C of G 9.7"

in

aft of datum. Battery located in tail in front of 3rd bulkhead back from
float point, fiberglass tail spring and Scott 3200 tailwheel.

My Rebel O-320-C2A (same as B1) with full gyro panel, warp drive prop,

Gill

25 Battery (still) on the firewall lengthwise, alum. flaperons and 16lb of
counterbalance, 4 upholstered seats, wheel pants, 3 leaf steel tail spring
and Scott 3200 tailwheel just weighed in at 996 lb(painted), empty C of G
10.42" aft of datum.

Rebel I just rebuilt O-320-E2D, Full gyro panel, 40 lb Sensenich

Propellor,

battery just behind float point bulkhead, fiberglass tail spring and Maule
tailwheel weighed out at 966lb (unpainted) and empty C of G 8.16" aft of
datum.

All 3 aircraft when piloted and fueled, fit pretty much into Murphy's new
preferred operating C of G (the very forward part of it anyway)

The closest 2, to compare, are Howards and the rebuild as they only

weighed

out 16 lbs different and the first obvious difference is 8 lbs for the
propellors. Next is the tailwheel, Maule about 3 lbs lighter than the

Scott.

This puts them within 5 lbs of each other but C of G 1.6" different. If I
moved the Battery back to the matching location as Howards this would make
them almost identical. And yes, you can really feel the difference flying
the Rebuild at low fuel weights compared to flying mine with the 10.42

empty

C of G. Stalls quicker and less elevator authority(I can still land it
tailwheel first though), but nothing that is going to take you by

surprise.

This Nose Heavy C of G is easy to get rid of by loading your aircraft
baggage compartment with all the stuff you need to survive at Oshkosh for

a

week(or your winter survival kit and snowshoes this time of year(I know

you

don't get snow in California)) or simply putting the Battery further back,
putting a steel tail spring and heavy tailwheel on. Every 5 lbs at the

tail

spring area will move the empty C of G back approximately 1". If I removed
30 lbs from the nose, by putting a Warp Drive Prop on, this aircrafts C of

G

would be absolutely perfect.(but I really prefer the performance of this

new

74X56 Sensenich Prop!)

I can't make the decision for you, I can only offer past experiences and
knowledge! By the way, anyone telling you that their O-320 Rebel weighs

less

than 900lbs even with a sparse panel and bare interior, weighed their

plane

on "broken" scales so they could "legally" carry the extra weight they

know

it can!(or left some parts out of the plane)

By the way the tail spring I mentioned(since there has been a lot of talk
about them), is available at CANADIAN TIRE! 3 leaf utility trailer spring,

1

3/4" wide(just like we need), approx. $32, cut the curls off both ends,
double spring area bolted to tailwheel. 3rd reinforcing leaf area centered
between wheel and post, double spring area under post clamps(same

thickness

as original aluminum one) and single leaf area bolted to tail cone attach
bracket. Adjust tail wheel trailing angle to liking with spacer at attach
bolt. (I haven't managed to make this steel one go up through my rudder

yet,

but I did it with both the aluminum one and the fiberglass one)

Anyone tired of my babbling yet? My Wife wants me to get some work done
around here, so see you later!

Blue skies, Wayne

P.S. I only went to 150 HP because I was tired of getting stuck in wet

snow

on wheel penetration skis.(but I can sure get used to this 2100FPM

climb(at

1350lbs) on wheels) A 118HP O-235 would be just fine if you are only
planning to fly wheels. If you change your mind later and switch to an
O-320, by then there will be a market for all of our old O-235's as the

kit

industry has realized there is now a surplus of them and are building kits
such as the RV-9 to use these lower powered engines!

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Patterson <bob.patterson@canrem.com>
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List <murphy-rebel@dcsol.com>
Date: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 7:04 PM
Subject: Re: Rebel "652" Wing tanks

Let's back up a bit .... Are you absolutely sure you want to use the
O-320 ?? Why ??? You really have to think about the kind of flying
you will be doing - and how much all that fuel will cost over the next
20 or 30 years ! ;-) The upgrade can always be done later, although
it IS a big job - it starts at the front of the door posts ! There
are at least 3 Rebels here that have flown happily for years, with
O-235's, then been upgraded.

I'm already on record as not liking the O-320 Rebel from a pilot
position - it moves you back 3", your feet, your seat, and your EYES !!
The visibility and overall feel of flying the aircraft is COMPLETELY
different ! <I> like sitting up front, with lots of sky visible -
old glider pilot thing ! :-) If you've never flown anything else, it
likely isn't a problem ... the Rebel is still "The Best floatplane in the
world !" (TM) :-) You will find that you will NEED to install at
least the overhead skylights, so you can see out in turns ! With the
standard firewall position, the windshield and the small oval skylights
are enough for a good lookout... the extras are really nice, though.

The Rebels that didn't have the firewall moved were very early ones,
before the factory had done the mods. themselves. If the C of G is very
far forward, you do not get the same feel or performance from the

aircraft.

It will be harder to land well, and cruise will definitely be slower...
If the CofG is moved back, you still have the extra load on the mounts,
firewall, and fuse sides - although the floatfix mods & the firewall
beefups should help considerably with that ...

Keith Kinden did the first O-320, not moved - are you here, Keith ???
Any helpful comments ???

.....bobp

-----------------------------orig.---------------------------------------

--

--
At 12:43 PM 12/1/99 -0500, you wrote:

with

my gut feeling and stick with the original designed "wet wing". I hope

that

this is just the description and not the result-Ha! ha!. One more

question

and that is in regarding firewall placement with the "O320". I will

gladly

build it the suggested (3" back) as the instructions indicate, but I

know

there are Rebels out there at the original position supporting this power
plant-What are your thoughts-(I'm probably about 4/6 weeks from starting
the fuselage)-Thanks again-Bob
really
designed

the

placement
back)

there

at the

thoughts-(I'm

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*
*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Bob Patterson · Post by **Bob Patterson** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:39 pm

Thanks for the useful info, Wayne - a wealth of experience again !

Interesting !! I didn't realize - are you saying that all 3 Rebels have
the firewall in the "normal" position, and your firewall mods ??? If so, that
is QUITE a recommendation for the mods, as there is all that extra arm at
work there ... I guess you added something to the fuse side panels,
as well ???

I recall that Murphy now suggests about 12" aft of datum as the forward
limit - this is a LONG way from the old (I think) 7 1/2" !! Have flown a few
Rebels with very far forward CofG's - no big problem, as long as you knew
what to expect. There certainly wasn't a problem with Howard's (other than
those @##$$% electric flaps :-( ) .... although it DID need a little
extra speed or power to get a good flair on floats. A little extra baggage
would have fixed THAT !

(Sorry Curt, but that WAS an example of a BAD electric flap installation
(IMHO only ....) ! There seem to be many more BAD ones than good ones
like yours .... )

The lightest O-320 rebel I've heard of was 906 lb., painted, on
wheels ... They seem to run in the 930 - 960 range, usually.

A reminder to all - no matter where your firewall is, be SURE you
have AT LEAST 27 degrees of UP elevator travel before flying ! Don't
worry if this leaves less than 25 down ....
......bobp

-----------------------------orig.-------------------------------------------
At 08:30 PM 12/1/99 -0500, you wrote:

Bob, Bob and ALL,
Three O-320 Rebels now and you still couldn't get me to move the firewall!
Like Bob P. says everything gets moved back 3 inches except the cabin around
you! Radios no longer fit the panel(the original firewall position only
leaves 1/4" on a KLX135 comm/gps), the windshield will now overhang the
engine compartment, rudder pedals move back, thus you sit 3" further back,
stick no longer in comfortable spot if left on the carrythru, etc. etc. If
it comes out a little nose heavy, it just means that the more your throw in
the back, the better it flys and you don't have to worry about exceeding the
aft CofG.

To give you ideas of weights and balances:

Howard's O-320-E2D rebel with full gyro panel, 32lb McCauley prop etc
weighed out at 950lb( when unpainted and on wheels) and empty C of G 9.7" in
aft of datum. Battery located in tail in front of 3rd bulkhead back from
float point, fiberglass tail spring and Scott 3200 tailwheel.

My Rebel O-320-C2A (same as B1) with full gyro panel, warp drive prop, Gill
25 Battery (still) on the firewall lengthwise, alum. flaperons and 16lb of
counterbalance, 4 upholstered seats, wheel pants, 3 leaf steel tail spring
and Scott 3200 tailwheel just weighed in at 996 lb(painted), empty C of G
10.42" aft of datum.

Rebel I just rebuilt O-320-E2D, Full gyro panel, 40 lb Sensenich Propellor,
battery just behind float point bulkhead, fiberglass tail spring and Maule
tailwheel weighed out at 966lb (unpainted) and empty C of G 8.16" aft of
datum.

All 3 aircraft when piloted and fueled, fit pretty much into Murphy's new
preferred operating C of G (the very forward part of it anyway)

The closest 2, to compare, are Howards and the rebuild as they only weighed
out 16 lbs different and the first obvious difference is 8 lbs for the
propellors. Next is the tailwheel, Maule about 3 lbs lighter than the Scott.
This puts them within 5 lbs of each other but C of G 1.6" different. If I
moved the Battery back to the matching location as Howards this would make
them almost identical. And yes, you can really feel the difference flying
the Rebuild at low fuel weights compared to flying mine with the 10.42 empty
C of G. Stalls quicker and less elevator authority(I can still land it
tailwheel first though), but nothing that is going to take you by surprise.

This Nose Heavy C of G is easy to get rid of by loading your aircraft
baggage compartment with all the stuff you need to survive at Oshkosh for a
week(or your winter survival kit and snowshoes this time of year(I know you
don't get snow in California)) or simply putting the Battery further back,
putting a steel tail spring and heavy tailwheel on. Every 5 lbs at the tail
spring area will move the empty C of G back approximately 1". If I removed
30 lbs from the nose, by putting a Warp Drive Prop on, this aircrafts C of G
would be absolutely perfect.(but I really prefer the performance of this new
74X56 Sensenich Prop!)

I can't make the decision for you, I can only offer past experiences and
knowledge! By the way, anyone telling you that their O-320 Rebel weighs less
than 900lbs even with a sparse panel and bare interior, weighed their plane
on "broken" scales so they could "legally" carry the extra weight they know
it can!(or left some parts out of the plane)

By the way the tail spring I mentioned(since there has been a lot of talk
about them), is available at CANADIAN TIRE! 3 leaf utility trailer spring, 1
3/4" wide(just like we need), approx. $32, cut the curls off both ends,
double spring area bolted to tailwheel. 3rd reinforcing leaf area centered
between wheel and post, double spring area under post clamps(same thickness
as original aluminum one) and single leaf area bolted to tail cone attach
bracket. Adjust tail wheel trailing angle to liking with spacer at attach
bolt. (I haven't managed to make this steel one go up through my rudder yet,
but I did it with both the aluminum one and the fiberglass one)

Anyone tired of my babbling yet? My Wife wants me to get some work done
around here, so see you later!

Blue skies, Wayne

P.S. I only went to 150 HP because I was tired of getting stuck in wet snow
on wheel penetration skis.(but I can sure get used to this 2100FPM climb(at
1350lbs) on wheels) A 118HP O-235 would be just fine if you are only
planning to fly wheels. If you change your mind later and switch to an
O-320, by then there will be a market for all of our old O-235's as the kit
industry has realized there is now a surplus of them and are building kits
such as the RV-9 to use these lower powered engines!

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Patterson <bob.patterson@canrem.com>
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List <murphy-rebel@dcsol.com>
Date: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 7:04 PM
Subject: Re: Rebel "652" Wing tanks

Let's back up a bit .... Are you absolutely sure you want to use the
O-320 ?? Why ??? You really have to think about the kind of flying
you will be doing - and how much all that fuel will cost over the next
20 or 30 years ! ;-) The upgrade can always be done later, although
it IS a big job - it starts at the front of the door posts ! There
are at least 3 Rebels here that have flown happily for years, with
O-235's, then been upgraded.

I'm already on record as not liking the O-320 Rebel from a pilot
position - it moves you back 3", your feet, your seat, and your EYES !!
The visibility and overall feel of flying the aircraft is COMPLETELY
different ! <I> like sitting up front, with lots of sky visible -
old glider pilot thing ! :-) If you've never flown anything else, it
likely isn't a problem ... the Rebel is still "The Best floatplane in the
world !" (TM) :-) You will find that you will NEED to install at
least the overhead skylights, so you can see out in turns ! With the
standard firewall position, the windshield and the small oval skylights
are enough for a good lookout... the extras are really nice, though.

The Rebels that didn't have the firewall moved were very early ones,
before the factory had done the mods. themselves. If the C of G is very
far forward, you do not get the same feel or performance from the aircraft.
It will be harder to land well, and cruise will definitely be slower...
If the CofG is moved back, you still have the extra load on the mounts,
firewall, and fuse sides - although the floatfix mods & the firewall
beefups should help considerably with that ...

Keith Kinden did the first O-320, not moved - are you here, Keith ???
Any helpful comments ???

.....bobp

-----------------------------orig.-----------------------------------------
--
At 12:43 PM 12/1/99 -0500, you wrote:
Thanks Guys for all the replies. This really just convinced me to go with
my gut feeling and stick with the original designed "wet wing". I hope that
this is just the description and not the result-Ha! ha!. One more question
and that is in regarding firewall placement with the "O320". I will gladly
build it the suggested (3" back) as the instructions indicate, but I know
there are Rebels out there at the original position supporting this power
plant-What are your thoughts-(I'm probably about 4/6 weeks from starting
the fuselage)-Thanks again-Bob
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Thanks Guys for all the replies. This
really
just convinced me to go with my gut feeling and stick with the original
designed
"wet wing". I hope that this is just the description and not the
result-Ha! ha!. One more question and that is in regarding firewall
placement
with the "O320". I will gladly build it the suggested (3"
back)
as the instructions  indicate, but I know there are Rebels out there
at the
original position supporting this power plant-What are your thoughts-(I'm
probably about  4/6 weeks from starting the fuselage)-Thanks
again-Bob</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*
*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Brian Cross · Post by **Brian Cross** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:39 pm

Hi There Folks

The thought that Bob expressed about moving the firewall back is a very
valid one when dealing with the heavy 0320 engines. A 3" movement does not
sound like very much, but, if one were to do the stress analysis on it, it
means a great deal. I would have to double check my text books, but I'm
sure that the induced bending stresses in an overhung load such as this goes
up the square of the distance away from the structure, i.e. double the
distance and you have 4 times the bending stress. In other words, a 3"
movement on a moment arm of about 27" will equate to a significant reduction
in stress of the nose area. Will it be enough to prevent problems? So far
so good in my case, but time will tell or should I say one of my bad
landings will tell!

That was a strong enough argument for me to move the firewall back. With
careful placement of the stick i.e. mounted centrally over the 2" cross
tubes as per the original design but with bent sticks to prevent it from
touching the dash, there is no difficulty at all with stick interference or
forward visibility especially with the speed cowl which really improves the
view over the nose. With this setup I am very happy with results. After
flying Cessnas, I feel I can see the whole world out front and the only
difficulty I have with the aircraft is to make it stop climbing!
(Seriously, until you get used to all the view over the nose).

Best Regards

Brian #328R

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Patterson [mailto:bob.patterson@canrem.com]
Sent: Friday, December 03, 1999 10:24 PM
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List
Subject: Re: Rebel "652" Wing tanks

Ken, to confuse things further ...

The Rebel that Wayne is talking about, that he just finished
rebuilding, without moving the firewall, was originally powered by a
modified Formula Power Subaru Legacy. As far as I know, it flew very nicely
in that configuration, on wheels and straight floats ....
(until the floats - NOT Murphy floats - soaked up a little too much water !)
:-(

.....bobp

<I> would worry about the forward fuse side walls, and the firewall,
and the top panel on the instrument panel, if that heavy engine were not
moved back, though ....

(and everybody wonders WHY I really like that 158 lb Rotax 912-S !! ;-) )
====== (Great Big Grin !)

-------------------------------orig.--------------------------------------
At 09:13 AM 12/2/99 -0500, you wrote:

Bob
Just to add more confusion.... At the 1998 OSK builder's dinner, Daryl

Murphy

said that he thought all Rebels, regardless of engine, should have the

firewall

moved back. I am not delighted with the moved back seat position, but I did

it

anyway, partly as I expect the 1800 amphib floats to slightly pull the C of

G

forward. I think my Subaru weight and c of g is going to be very close to

an

0-320.
The mod also pulls the instrument panel back to maintain instrument space

behind

it.
Ken

Bob Johnson wrote:
One more question and that
is in regarding firewall placement with the "O320". I will gladly build

it the

suggested (3" back) as the instructions indicate, but I know there are

Rebels

out there at the original position supporting this power plant-What are

your

thoughts-(I'm probably about 4/6 weeks from starting the

fuselage)-Thanks

again-Bob
*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Wayne G. O'Shea · Post by **Wayne G. O'Shea** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:39 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your following message has been delivered to the 134 members of
the list murphy-rebel@dcsol.com at 15:19:41 on 5 Dec 1999.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brian, Don't forget about Allisters firewall, that is moved back 3"! It was
very quick to start the self destruct mode!(so keep a close eye on yours)
Easier now than "later". And yes that slanted down nose on the speed cowl
takes a lot of getting use to for level flight!(especially after 100's of
hours in a rebel with the old style cowl) I constantly find myself climbing
through 4000AGL soon after departure on a local "low level" flight, because
I'm so use to keeping the nose level with the horizon!

Wayne

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Cross <rebelair@idirect.com>
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List <murphy-rebel@dcsol.com>
Date: Sunday, December 05, 1999 2:20 PM
Subject: RE: Rebel "652" Wing tanks

Hi There Folks

The thought that Bob expressed about moving the firewall back is a very
valid one when dealing with the heavy 0320 engines. A 3" movement does not
sound like very much, but, if one were to do the stress analysis on it, it
means a great deal. I would have to double check my text books, but I'm
sure that the induced bending stresses in an overhung load such as this

goes

up the square of the distance away from the structure, i.e. double the
distance and you have 4 times the bending stress. In other words, a 3"
movement on a moment arm of about 27" will equate to a significant

reduction

in stress of the nose area. Will it be enough to prevent problems? So far
so good in my case, but time will tell or should I say one of my bad
landings will tell!

That was a strong enough argument for me to move the firewall back. With
careful placement of the stick i.e. mounted centrally over the 2" cross
tubes as per the original design but with bent sticks to prevent it from
touching the dash, there is no difficulty at all with stick interference or
forward visibility especially with the speed cowl which really improves the
view over the nose. With this setup I am very happy with results. After
flying Cessnas, I feel I can see the whole world out front and the only
difficulty I have with the aircraft is to make it stop climbing!
(Seriously, until you get used to all the view over the nose).

Best Regards

Brian #328R

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Patterson [mailto:bob.patterson@canrem.com]
Sent: Friday, December 03, 1999 10:24 PM
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List
Subject: Re: Rebel "652" Wing tanks

Ken, to confuse things further ...

The Rebel that Wayne is talking about, that he just finished
rebuilding, without moving the firewall, was originally powered by a
modified Formula Power Subaru Legacy. As far as I know, it flew very nicely
in that configuration, on wheels and straight floats ....
(until the floats - NOT Murphy floats - soaked up a little too much water

!)

:-(

.....bobp

<I> would worry about the forward fuse side walls, and the firewall,
and the top panel on the instrument panel, if that heavy engine were not
moved back, though ....

(and everybody wonders WHY I really like that 158 lb Rotax 912-S !! ;-) )
====== (Great Big Grin !)

-------------------------------orig.--------------------------------------
At 09:13 AM 12/2/99 -0500, you wrote:
Bob
Just to add more confusion.... At the 1998 OSK builder's dinner, Daryl
Murphy
said that he thought all Rebels, regardless of engine, should have the
firewall
moved back. I am not delighted with the moved back seat position, but I

did

it
anyway, partly as I expect the 1800 amphib floats to slightly pull the C

of

G
forward. I think my Subaru weight and c of g is going to be very close to
an
0-320.
The mod also pulls the instrument panel back to maintain instrument space
behind
it.
Ken

Bob Johnson wrote:
One more question and that
is in regarding firewall placement with the "O320". I will gladly build
it the
suggested (3" back) as the instructions indicate, but I know there are
Rebels
out there at the original position supporting this power plant-What are
your
thoughts-(I'm probably about 4/6 weeks from starting the
fuselage)-Thanks
again-Bob
*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Brian Cross · Post by **Brian Cross** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:39 pm

Hi Wayne

Thanks for the advice. It is time for me to pull the cowl off again and
have a look. Everything is running so well, I almost hate to look - but, I
will. With the lousy weather we've had lately, I don't have any excuses to
take 20 minutes and check to see if anything is bending on the firewall, oil
fittings are snug & that the throttle & mixture is tight.

I must say, that I did the FUS-28 firewall fix/float fix exactly per MAM but
was not entirely happy with the concept because as you well know, there is
nothing right at the engine mount. If I have a problem at all there, I will
be giving you a call to order your fix.

Thanks again for you input, it is very helpful indeed.

Best Regards Again to All & Keep Building the Rebels, I want to see a whole
lot more out there. I am tired of my Glastar friend telling how many there
are in Canada & that he is going to fly at 170 mph and carry 950 lb. loads.

Brian #328R

-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne G. O'Shea [mailto:oifa@irishfield.on.ca]
Sent: Sunday, December 05, 1999 3:18 PM
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List
Subject: Re: Rebel "652" Wing tanks

Brian, Don't forget about Allisters firewall, that is moved back 3"! It was
very quick to start the self destruct mode!(so keep a close eye on yours)
Easier now than "later". And yes that slanted down nose on the speed cowl
takes a lot of getting use to for level flight!(especially after 100's of
hours in a rebel with the old style cowl) I constantly find myself climbing
through 4000AGL soon after departure on a local "low level" flight, because
I'm so use to keeping the nose level with the horizon!

Wayne

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Cross <rebelair@idirect.com>
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List <murphy-rebel@dcsol.com>
Date: Sunday, December 05, 1999 2:20 PM
Subject: RE: Rebel "652" Wing tanks

Hi There Folks

The thought that Bob expressed about moving the firewall back is a very
valid one when dealing with the heavy 0320 engines. A 3" movement does not
sound like very much, but, if one were to do the stress analysis on it, it
means a great deal. I would have to double check my text books, but I'm
sure that the induced bending stresses in an overhung load such as this

goes

up the square of the distance away from the structure, i.e. double the
distance and you have 4 times the bending stress. In other words, a 3"
movement on a moment arm of about 27" will equate to a significant

reduction

in stress of the nose area. Will it be enough to prevent problems? So far
so good in my case, but time will tell or should I say one of my bad
landings will tell!

That was a strong enough argument for me to move the firewall back. With
careful placement of the stick i.e. mounted centrally over the 2" cross
tubes as per the original design but with bent sticks to prevent it from
touching the dash, there is no difficulty at all with stick interference or
forward visibility especially with the speed cowl which really improves the
view over the nose. With this setup I am very happy with results. After
flying Cessnas, I feel I can see the whole world out front and the only
difficulty I have with the aircraft is to make it stop climbing!
(Seriously, until you get used to all the view over the nose).

Best Regards

Brian #328R

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Patterson [mailto:bob.patterson@canrem.com]
Sent: Friday, December 03, 1999 10:24 PM
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List
Subject: Re: Rebel "652" Wing tanks

Ken, to confuse things further ...

The Rebel that Wayne is talking about, that he just finished
rebuilding, without moving the firewall, was originally powered by a
modified Formula Power Subaru Legacy. As far as I know, it flew very nicely
in that configuration, on wheels and straight floats ....
(until the floats - NOT Murphy floats - soaked up a little too much water

!)

:-(

.....bobp

<I> would worry about the forward fuse side walls, and the firewall,
and the top panel on the instrument panel, if that heavy engine were not
moved back, though ....

(and everybody wonders WHY I really like that 158 lb Rotax 912-S !! ;-) )
====== (Great Big Grin !)

-------------------------------orig.--------------------------------------
At 09:13 AM 12/2/99 -0500, you wrote:
Bob
Just to add more confusion.... At the 1998 OSK builder's dinner, Daryl
Murphy
said that he thought all Rebels, regardless of engine, should have the
firewall
moved back. I am not delighted with the moved back seat position, but I

did

it
anyway, partly as I expect the 1800 amphib floats to slightly pull the C

of

G
forward. I think my Subaru weight and c of g is going to be very close to
an
0-320.
The mod also pulls the instrument panel back to maintain instrument space
behind
it.
Ken

Bob Johnson wrote:
One more question and that
is in regarding firewall placement with the "O320". I will gladly build
it the
suggested (3" back) as the instructions indicate, but I know there are
Rebels
out there at the original position supporting this power plant-What are
your
thoughts-(I'm probably about 4/6 weeks from starting the
fuselage)-Thanks
again-Bob
*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Wayne G. O'Shea · Post by **Wayne G. O'Shea** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:56 pm

Bob J., saw your message in the archives.

Do not slosh your tanks, you may NOT live to regret it if you do!

Take a 100 watt chandeler bulb (or similar that will fit through filler neck) and turn it on and lower it into the tank. Then turn out all the lights in your shop and see which stringer the light beam shines down. This will let you know where to put the access hole in the LOWER wing skin. Access through the lower skin gives you a better angle to work on the upper stringers. Also less stress in the lower skin than the top skins so access hole doubler etc, not as critical as it would be in the top skin that is in compression. Don't worry too much about the looks of the access hole spoiling your wing. It will just match most of the other Rebels flying out there!

Happy hunting!

Wayne G. O'Shea
www.irishfield.on.ca

The Murphy Builders Site