[quote="55wagon"No damage history but alot of the tail cone reskinned. [/quote]

You have mentioned that everything is properly rigged and moving full range, but I haven't heard you respond specifically that you have figured a 0 degree reference point of the firewall/wing root and then measured the movement/ base measurement of the tail surfaces relative to the reference point on the forward portion of the airframe. The digital levels allow this to be done very easily. Do you have the measurements to post so everyone can help more effectively?
Imagine if during the reskinning of the tailcone that the upper length was made too short or the lower length too long by just a whee little bit. The tail would be producing more negative lift/nose up effect and you would run out of forward trim regardless of how much stabilizer range of movement you have because it's alignment compared to the wing and firewall is altered.
My 2c.

Matt, you managed to sum up my post with half the words, twice as effectively

Haha! Thanks guys. Ill Ty and get that stuff ASAP. I'm not as smart as y'all on this stuff so I really appreciate the help. Very mechanical just never been one much for knowing the rigging and alignment aspects and all that jazz.
Anyone know anyone in Texas good at this stuff? We're wayyyy low on good mechanics in south Texas.

Matt 7GCBC wrote:[quote="55wagon"No damage history but alot of the tail cone reskinned.

You have mentioned that everything is properly rigged and moving full range, but I haven't heard you respond specifically that you have figured a 0 degree reference point of the firewall/wing root and then measured the movement/ base measurement of the tail surfaces relative to the reference point on the forward portion of the airframe. The digital levels allow this to be done very easily. Do you have the measurements to post so everyone can help more effectively?
Imagine if during the reskinning of the tailcone that the upper length was made too short or the lower length too long by just a whee little bit. The tail would be producing more negative lift/nose up effect and you would run out of forward trim regardless of how much stabilizer range of movement you have because it's alignment compared to the wing and firewall is altered.
My 2c.[/quote]


Very nice post!

AK.. Where did u end up setting your eccentrics? Do y'all think it would help to try and change those? Ill be getting some preliminary weights an measurements tomorrow. Have to say this is about the sickest I've felt about any plane I've owned. Can't help but be worrying and thinking the worst after I've just put a ton of $ in it.

55wagon wrote:AK.. Where did u end up setting your eccentrics? Do y'all think it would help to try and change those? Ill be getting some preliminary weights an measurements tomorrow. Have to say this is about the sickest I've felt about any plane I've owned. Can't help but be worrying and thinking the worst after I've just put a ton of $ in it.

I wish that I was more mechanically sound. I am just not when it comes to jackscrews and roll pins...

There is a lot of info however on the skywagon email discussion list..not the web site forum, the email you can sign up for from it. Check it out

Bummer on the feeling...It always works out...

AKT

I would have to think the shop that did the re-skinning where complete dimwits to make the error your all describing. We re-skin a lot of aircraft, since we do a ton of damage repairs. When you do it you remove only a skin at a time, use the old skin as the drill template for the new one. They come out incredibly close dimensionally.

Lets see if I read you correctly now, your saying, you had re-skinning done, at the same time the wing extensions where installed? or at a different time? We just turned down a skydive 205 that had a poorly installed STOL kit that flew very poorly, all trims out to max. Well the STOL kit was covering up a poorly done wing repair. The outer 1/3 of the wings had improper twist. We recommended to either get these re-jigged or get replacement wings, but we where not touching them.

Personally, I would start with the rigging, get that set to book, then if it still has the trim problems, then I would re-weigh the beast. Failing that I would see how much of a change adjusting the angle of incidence with eccentrics makes. Just most 180/185's seem to not have much adjustment left in them. I just would not touch that area until I had all controls rigged to spec. If this happened after the STOL kit install, I would be on their doorstep to deal with it.

Dog, the scenario 'we all' described is no different than the scenario you described on the 205, save the fact that your scenario was a wing (which also most certainly be the case here) and the one some of us are leaning towards is a tail cone skin, top deck, door post, fire wall or one of several other AOI changing possibilities... We're on the same page, just reading from opposite ends (the potential for a poor repair)

And for anyone skeptical of the amount 'off' some thing in the tail has to be to provide the described effect I would urge you to grab ahold of that little 4" trim tab you have on the tail and give it a 1/4" tweak to the right. Then report back to us on how square your ship is flying afterwards... Now imagine the same concept spread across the whole tail, or worse yet wing

I agree that there is potential for a rigging issue, stretched cable, twisted wing or control surface etc... Etc..

All this being a good reason to invest in a manual and a smart level or digital level. As a matter of fact if you have a timing kit with an inclinometer that works just as well too. All of these enable a guy to measure up a plane in under an hour without having to level the tail (although I prefer to at least level up laterally so I am able to match wings and tail surfaces) and do so more accurately than even the factory did...

When I rig a cub, I use a smart level, as a general rule I can hang the wings and bank on the thing flying hands off right from the get- go.

I didn't read all posts, so forgive me if this was discussed, but I'm wondering if you'r getting full travel on the ground, but not once your airborne....odd one.

joecub wrote:I didn't read all posts, so forgive me if this was discussed, but I'm wondering if you'r getting full travel on the ground, but not once your airborne....odd one.

Hey joe how've ya been?
I had wondered the same, which would be spooky, because then where do you go? Cracked bulkhead? Failing cable? Yowza... That could be fun

Really interested to see what '55 discovers

Dog. Thanks. I bought the plane with the wing x, and sportsman already on. The reskinning was done apparently off the books since it had "no" damage history.

Rob. How bout I just buy you a ticket out to visit and help me figure this sob out since your just laying around anyways. Ill take ya fishing. Hahaha. Seriously. I wish I had someone like you here to help do what all your talking about. I know I could learn it quick but I'm a hands on guy and never done that. Guess I'm about to learn. I know of no one whatsoever close to here I can trust to take it to. Is it not strange it flies amazing in all other aspects?? Hands off, wings level, ailerons even etc. no weird characteristics. just when you load up the back is when it gets crazy. Hoping to borrow some scales and levels tomorrow to start some preliminaries. Hopefully you get those gauze out soon so you can call me and help my ignorant brain wrap around this thing. Again I wanna thank everyone for taking the time to help. I know its a pain.

No it's not the case I don't think. Because I land with full forward trim. And that's where it is when I get out. And also that whole area was just gone through and specifically checked for this problem since it was that way before. Just didn't know how bad because I hadn't hauled a real load yet. I'm fairly confident the entire tail area is sound and adjusted properly. That's the bad part. That's why I fear its elsewhere.

Is there any chance that there is some lead weights installed in the tail for cofg purposes on floats, or it having a 3 blade prop previously, or something of those sorts?
I don't know if anyone puts weight in the tail of a 180, but i've seen it in stinsons, but that was to counteract the big 0470 install.

If the weights where installed "properly," they may 'look' like they belong to the untrained eye. but a 180 guy would look and say 'those don't belong there'.

I've been watching this thread, just to see what the 'result' ends up being

Ok. Little early I know but I'm waiting on the scales for the front wheels. I did just weigh the tail in flight attitude(top door jams level) and it weighs 150lbs! If rob is correct on what it should weigh I'm in the ball park of 30lbs off. A 3 blade prop won't help a flip. It took 150lbs hanging on the prop to bring the tail pressure down to around 120!
This is with 50 gallons of fuel on board btw

55wagon wrote: Because I land with full forward trim.

Something is seriously off. Even when loaded toward the aft end of the CG envelope, my '59 lands with the trim quite a ways behind center.

Another note. It had skis at one time and I can't find where they removed the weight of the skis and rigging (145lbs) when they were removed. I know zero about skis. Do you have to add tail weight somewhere to compensate any? Also is it possible they used heavier skins when reskinning tail come area? What a mess.

Oregon180 wrote:

55wagon wrote: Because I land with full forward trim.

Something is seriously off. Even when loaded toward the aft end of the CG envelope, my '59 lands with the trim quite a ways behind center.

yep me to...when the MT prop went on it came back close to center but still slightly aft of center.

With skis on, the cg goes far forward but never do I need to add any weights in the rear even with a 250 pounder in the front with me.

AKT

55wagon wrote:Ok. Little early I know but I'm waiting on the scales for the front wheels. I did just weigh the tail in flight attitude(top door jams level) and it weighs 150lbs! If rob is correct on what it should weigh I'm in the ball park of 30lbs off. A 3 blade prop won't help a flip. It took 150lbs hanging on the prop to bring the tail pressure down to around 120!
This is with 50 gallons of fuel on board btw

150# with full fuel sounds in the ballpark. Mine was weighed that way, and it was in the high 140's if I remember correctly. Mine is a 53, but has forward swept HD main gear.

55, a picture is worth a 1,000 words. Can you run the trim full nose up and take a pic of the tail group from the side? I know the photo gallery is closed but if you could post it to a photo sharing site I'd bet the group could help more.

My guess without having more info is that the trim was rigged backwards. It is the only theory that makes sense. You can't fly faster with more nose up trim than in slow flight.

Flynengr

Jason, I just went out an checked my old junker---it is pretty original. When the trim is rolled all the way forward, the front of the leading edge of the horizontal is centered on the top of the 10 inch side skin that goes from the rear door post back to the bulkhead just ahead of the jackscrews. Also, there is a fairing at the base of the vertical fin that has 4 screws into the fin. I stood a yardstick standing straight up from the top of the horizontal to the bottom of the vertical at the front screw and it is 3 and 1/8 inches.

Flynengr.thanks. It's definetly not rigged backwards. I would do the picture thing but I haven't a clue on that. This is the extent of my vast computer skills. This and running a 496 or satloc...somewhat. from what I've been gathering there's no way my plane should weigh more than 125lbs tops. High side even. If yours is 145 it's even heavy. I've got a firewall battery and no back seat even. I'm guessing it's got about 30+or - pounds of excess force on the tail. Have you ever run a heavy load in her? Especially towards the back? Trim seem just find? My old bird could be really heavy loaded in back and have plenty of trim.

Marty. Thanks so much for that. I'll match up to see what I get here shortly. Like I was telling rob. I got a badass 2 seater 180. Lol. Gotta laugh to keep from crying right now.

My skins are the correct thickness and the repairs appear excellent. I don't have a manual to look at so if anyone has any other measurements for me to check that'd be great as well. I can't find any kind of extra weight yet and that just seems to be the main thing to look for being that heavy. Headed back out to do some more measuring and looking.