RE: Diversification #471 - 36g again
The correct translation (see post #440) of the french report shows that 36 g is a part name and not acceleration.
I respectfully submit that we have two translations - one with the linguístic and engineering expertise of the BEA behind it, and one from "a person born in the UK, educated both there and in France, and who has lived in France for over 40 years".
The latter may well be linguistically correct, but in my opinion it does not reflect what the BEA is trying to say. In my opinion the word "corresponding to" is intended to link "120 000 N" to another quantity, e.g. "36 g", and not just an arm.
Edit:
Its turns out that my first calculation was too simplistic and it has therefore been deleted. The FAR Part 25 regulations specify an ultimate load corresponding to 24*1.5=36 g. The rudder and supporting hinge brackets must be able to support an inertia ultimate load acting parallel to the hinge line of 24*1.5=36 times the weight of the rudder. Since Arm 36g is at an angle of 38 degrees to the rudder hinge line, 120 000 N in the direction of that arm corresponds to 94 561 N along the rudder hingeline, and hence to a rudder mass of 268 kg.
regards,
HN39