Morgan Sierra safety

facthunter

First Class Member
First Class Member
Gary has certainly been an enthusiast. Having the wheels back too far will throw the plane forward on to the nosewheel on landing unless you land flat (faster) which may not suit all conditions. As long as it doesn't get very nosewheel light on full rearward Cof G the mainwheels could be repositioned. Fuselage location of fuel tanks can result in a large Cof G variation, if they are well forward or rearward. Nev
 
Last edited:

kgwilson

Well-Known Member
I'd like to see your construction pics??
See http://www.recreationalflying.com/threads/sierra-100-kit-build-underway.27366/

I have just returned from Taree as I needed to get current after doing little flying for the past 4 years. I did nearly 9 hours in 3 days with Garry. As an ex GA pilot it was my landing technique that held me back. The Sierra is easy to fly and needs little control input but on landing you need to fly to the ground & hold off with the nose about 1/2 way to the horizon & the mains about a foot or less from the tarmac. Then pull the stick right back & it will land perfectly. A lot of people have bent nose legs as they don't land the aircraft properly. It is a high performance aircraft & while the VsO is only 32 knots you can't just come in & waffle around like a Cessna or PA 28 & expect it to just settle on to the deck. It won't & you will be up for a new nose leg at the very least.
 

microman

Well-Known Member
I think most of us are aware that with any nosewheel aircraft you need to keep the stick back, allow the mains to drop onto the runway and then the nosewheel will drop of its own accord as the speed decays. Unfortunately both the Cheetah especially, and the Sierra to a lesser degree wanted to drop onto the nose much earlier - a clear sign that the maingear is too far back. You may get away with it landing on long smooth strips, but the rather agricultural nature of many of our strips means that any premature lowering of the nose can have catastrophic effects.
 

Camel

Well-Known Member
I think most of us are aware that with any nosewheel aircraft you need to keep the stick back, allow the mains to drop onto the runway and then the nosewheel will drop of its own accord as the speed decays. Unfortunately both the Cheetah especially, and the Sierra to a lesser degree wanted to drop onto the nose much earlier - a clear sign that the maingear is too far back. You may get away with it landing on long smooth strips, but the rather agricultural nature of many of our strips means that any premature lowering of the nose can have catastrophic effects.
Not going to dispute your view ! The fuel tank is in front of the instrument panel ! I have flown the Sierra around 60 hours and I find it a little nose heavy when full of fuel but not a problem to take off or land, the Sierra is a very strong, well designed and well behaved aircraft it has a low stall speed and a high top speed.
 

Flyer

Well-Known Member
I had the opportunity to fly Garys sierra 200 a few years back. Skeptical to start with and in love with it by the time we landed.
A delightful plane, fast, easy to manoeuvre and very forgiving from what I found.
Would I own one ? absolutely.
I do thank Gary for taking time to answer questions and show me around his factory.

 

diesel

Active Member
re Morgan elevators, was looking at a new build at Wanaka NZ. Well correction, stabilator with no anti tab and owner said no mass balance either. The control surface seemed quite stiff to move with the morse? type cable. Is this correct? Chas.
 

kgwilson

Well-Known Member
re Morgan elevators, was looking at a new build at Wanaka NZ. Well correction, stabilator with no anti tab and owner said no mass balance either. The control surface seemed quite stiff to move with the morse? type cable. Is this correct? Chas.
No, the stabilator should be mass balanced to eliminate the possibility of flutter. The Sierra is fast with a 3300 jab engine (130kt cruise) so mass balancing in my opinion is essential. Mine has 2.6kg of lead with the mass balance arm part of the elevator bell crank which comes with the kit. There is no trim tab & the trim lever or wheel trims the entire stabilator. Some builders have installed their own trim tab but the standard kit does not include this. My elevator control is very light & is dampened with the bungees from the trim wheel to the stick. The cable is a push-pull Bowden type cable.
 
I also agree that Gary Morgan has come up with some great aircraft - although they tend to need some mods to really make them fly nicely. We have a Cheetah on the field and after the owner had wrecked two nosewheels and props we moved the mains forward 8 in to take some of the weight off the nose, replaced the main gear with ally leaf spring and reinforced the darn near useless KR2 nosewheel leg. Now it flys beautifully. We also delivered a Sierra from down south earlier this week and it also flys well - just needs a few little mods to improve it still further. With the Rotax 912S and in-flight variable pitch Ivoprop it gets up to nearly 150 kts and will cruise at 110kts at 4000 rpm
Hi Microman,Could you please let me have details of the under carriage mods for the cheetah.Thanks Alf
 

microman

Well-Known Member
Alf George - pretty much all you need to know is set out above - nothing I can really add! We've done the same mods (and others) to the Sierra and its now good to go also.
 

microman

Well-Known Member
We made the new U/C ourselves, simply purchased the aluminium then bent it into the desired shape - nothing difficult about it if you have the right gear. The alternative would be to order it readymade from someone like Grove Aircraft Landing Gear Systems in the US.
 

bexrbetter

Well-Known Member
We made the new U/C ourselves, simply purchased the aluminium then bent it into the desired shape - nothing difficult about it if you have the right gear. The alternative would be to order it readymade from someone like Grove Aircraft Landing Gear Systems in the US.
7075 T6?

Width?

Thickness?

Grove are pretty expensive.
 

Garry Morgan

Morgan range of aircraft
We made the new U/C ourselves, simply purchased the aluminium then bent it into the desired shape - nothing difficult about it if you have the right gear. The alternative would be to order it readymade from someone like Grove Aircraft Landing Gear Systems in the US.
If you are going to bag the product , please get your facts right. First if you crash your car into a tree don't winge if it brakes. This is what you are doing, the nose legs don't just brake. The Cheetah you talk about, you failed to say it stalled from 30'. Yes it will brake the nose wheel and this was the first time a main under carriage has broken, what else do you expect. Also the nose leg is not a KR leg. The KR leg is a lot longer and thinner wall. The other time down south it went into a hole. The other times legs broke the pilot is to blame not the aircraft . I know how hard you have to hit it on the ground to bend it. And i may say not every one will tell the truth what has happened.
The elevator must be mass balanced, the stiff elevator is not the cable, but the trim. Do not fit a anti servo tab to any of the Morgan aircraft. It will destory the nice trim handling.
The moving of the undercarriage is needed on the cheetah because it was sent out in a kit for the 2.2 Jabiru motor not a Rotax . Going from 130lb to 170-185lb does change the weight on the nose wheel. It can be moved 50mm foward in the normal set up. which will allow the nose to be held off at 20 kts. The reason the mains are where they are, is so when both pilot and passenger get into the aircraft it doesent fall on its tail.
 

microman

Well-Known Member
I accept much of what you say Garry - in particular the point about the Cheetah being designed for a Jabiru engine, and the heavier Rotax adding considerable weight to the nosewheel, however in relation to the Cheetah there was a broken noseleg on the first occasion and the second time as well as the noseleg the main U/C also gave way. (I saw it and it was a lot less than 30 ft!) That was when we decided that aluminium would provide greater strength. I accept also that the Cheetah in question was not constructed in accordance with the plans and some of the mods carried out were simply righting the problems that had been caused.

As I said in my earlier post, both the Cheetah and the Sierra perform very well - we were particularly impressed with the performance of the Sierra, and once the U/C was shifted forward and the noseleg beefed up it became an even better aircraft.
 
Top