Do You Secure Your Cargo?

[Shadrach]

I have had four adults plus an infant and bags to the ceiling. I was uncomfortable with bags above seat level but everything was soft and light. I’m more conservative now and would like a retainer separating the cargo from the soft squishy bits.

[A64Pilot]

9 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

That outboard mowed down 2 rows of seats.

An outboard meets my definition of stupid heavy, as did the T bottles of helium in the pic I attached that were secured.

I couldn’t get an outboard in my Mooney, the scooters just barely fit, an inch larger and they probably wouldn’t.

We can argue this forever, there are in my opinion acceptable levels of risk, the scooters are acceptable to me

[Shadrach]

14 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

That outboard mowed down 2 rows of seats.

I saw a Mooney on the ramp at FDK with a single use, metal, fire extinguisher in the hat rack. It looked it was just waiting to become a projectile.

[GeeBee]

I am just always amazed where everything ends up when things go flying through the cabin. 

[GeeBee]

1 hour ago, Shadrach said:

I saw a Mooney on the ramp at FDK with a single use, metal, fire extinguisher in the hat rack. It looked it was just waiting to become a projectile.

Even worse, it is not reachable in an emergency. It has no value.

[EricJ]

2 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

Even worse, it is not reachable in an emergency. It has no value.

It would on the ground, which is the only place I'd use one of those, anyway.    But, yeah, the hatrack is a very dangerous place for it.

[Shadrach]

13 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

Even worse, it is not reachable in an emergency. It has no value.

Agreed. My guess is that it was initially stowed elsewhere and then migrated to the hat rack. 8lbs of steel to the back of the head would be a bad deal. I keep a fire extinguisher behind right seat when I don’t have rear pax. When loaded with four and bags there just isn’t a good place for it.

[Shadrach]

9 minutes ago, EricJ said:

It would on the ground, which is the only place I'd use one of those, anyway.    But, yeah, the hatrack is a very dangerous place for it.

Yeah, I can’t envision an in flight fire that I’d be able to extinguish with an ABC from the cabin.  However, I allow for the fact that airplanes sometimes do things that I’ve not thought of.

[Fly Boomer]

3 hours ago, Shadrach said:

They all stall at high deck angles under full power. 

Hundred extra horsepower makes it a little higher.

[EricJ]

14 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Yeah, I can’t envision an in flight fire that I’d be able to extinguish with an ABC from the cabin.  However, I allow for the fact that airplanes sometimes do things that I’ve not thought of.

Setting one off in a small enclosed space can make more problems while potentially solving none.    A handheld is good for putting out a small fire on the ground and keeping it from getting bigger, but has very limited value beyond that in a small aircraft.

[Shadrach]

13 minutes ago, Fly Boomer said:

Hundred extra horsepower makes it a little higher.

If you calculate the power to weight ratios of both aircraft under typical load, you might be surprised.  Your Rocket probably has most favorable of the breed. What’s the dry weight?

[Fly Boomer]

4 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

If you calculate the power to weight ratios of both aircraft under typical load, you might be surprised.  Your Rocket probably has most favorable of the breed. What’s the dry weight?

Well, that remains to be seen.  Based on the numbers in the POH, with full fuel it's over gross before anybody gets in.  That may be a slight exaggeration, but you get the idea.  Everyone says "don't weigh your airplane" but it can't get much worse.

[Hank]

6 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

If you calculate the power to weight ratios of both aircraft under typical load, you might be surprised.  Your Rocket probably has most favorable of the breed. What’s the dry weight?

My C is just over 14 lb/hp at gross, more typically almost 13 lb/hp.

At 3200 gross, a 305 Rocket would be 10.5 lb/hp. No idea what typical Rocket weight are in flight 

[wombat]

My typical rocket weight in flight is about 3,000#

[Hank]

15 minutes ago, wombat said:

My typical rocket weight in flight is about 3,000#

So 9.8 lb/hp.

I bet your deck angle at stall is higher than mine, flying light at 13 lb/hp!

 

[Shadrach]

41 minutes ago, wombat said:

My typical rocket weight in flight is about 3,000#

That’s about what I guessed. 
So about ~10lbs per HP.

So typical weight for me, 4hrs of fuel and a bag is ~ 2150lbs (1680lb + 470lb) which works out to ~10.75lbs per hp. 
Not exactly an earth shattering difference.

Thrust to drag however is a “whole nother”calculation and is quite a bit more impressive.

[Fly Boomer]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

At 3200 gross, a 305 Rocket would be 10.5 lb/hp. No idea what typical Rocket weight are in flight 

About 3200.

[Shadrach]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

My C is just over 14 lb/hp at gross, more typically almost 13 lb/hp.

At 3200 gross, a 305 Rocket would be 10.5 lb/hp. No idea what typical Rocket weight are in flight 

I would bet that most Rockets are operated much closer to gross on a regular basis than a 200hp bird like mine. With 5hrs of fuel, bags and my wife and me on board, we’re about 400lbs under gross. The closest I’ve been to MGW is the aforementioned 4 adults + infant and bags. It was a shortish trip from central MD to KFFA (~250nm). We were a little more than 100lb under gross (and it felt as much in July). I could have have taken less fuel but KFFA does not have gas and I wanted to return home without making a stop. 
 

If I’m solo, I’m almost always under 2200

 

[Shadrach]

1 hour ago, Fly Boomer said:

Well, that remains to be seen.  Based on the numbers in the POH, with full fuel it's over gross before anybody gets in.  That may be a slight exaggeration, but you get the idea.  Everyone says "don't weigh your airplane" but it can't get much worse.

I know they are significantly heavier, but that seems extreme given that we have the same airframe and my dry weight is 1680lbs. I would’ve expected a delta at about 500 pounds.

[Fly Boomer]

1 hour ago, Shadrach said:

I know they are significantly heavier, but that seems extreme given that we have the same airframe and my dry weight is 1680lbs. I would’ve expected a delta at about 500 pounds.

I don't see how the numbers I have can be correct, so the scales are in my future (and maybe a diet).

[blaine beaven]

I’ve thought about this in the past… what I’ve considered doing is building a metal frame that bolts to the cargo area floor using the existing cargo strap attach points. 
 

The frame would extend forward and outwards to the corners of the cargo area behind the rear seat, then turn upward to follow the back of the seat. At the top of the bench seat it would angle straight up to the roof, following the contour of the cabin and joining at the headliner. 
 

On the interior of this frame would be attach points and a mesh net, basically creating a barrier between the occupant space and the cargo space. 

Anyone want to build and market this with me? We can spend millions to make thousands…

[Fly Boomer]

8 hours ago, blaine beaven said:

I’ve thought about this in the past… what I’ve considered doing is building a metal frame that bolts to the cargo area floor using the existing cargo strap attach points. 
 

The frame would extend forward and outwards to the corners of the cargo area behind the rear seat, then turn upward to follow the back of the seat. At the top of the bench seat it would angle straight up to the roof, following the contour of the cabin and joining at the headliner. 
 

On the interior of this frame would be attach points and a mesh net, basically creating a barrier between the occupant space and the cargo space. 

Anyone want to build and market this with me? We can spend millions to make thousands…

Sounds like something that could save lives.  If it was not permanently attached, the regulatory authorities would not get involved.

[blaine beaven]

1 hour ago, Fly Boomer said:

Sounds like something that could save lives.  If it was not permanently attached, the regulatory authorities would not get involved.

I suppose an alternative to attaching it to the existing bolts that attach the tie downs would be to make the base of it large enough that the cargo and seat would hold it in place.

[Fly Boomer]

2 hours ago, blaine beaven said:

I suppose an alternative to attaching it to the existing bolts that attach the tie downs would be to make the base of it large enough that the cargo and seat would hold it in place.

I think an argument could be made that studs or bolts on the airplane, and wingnuts holding the device would qualify as non-permanent.

[Hank]

31 minutes ago, Fly Boomer said:

I think an argument could be made that studs or bolts on the airplane, and wingnuts holding the device would qualify as non-permanent.

Wouldn't wingnuts get in the way of loading baggage? They stick up a good bit.