Posted by In need of disabuse on September 19, 2003 at 14:11:53:
In Reply to: Re: oversize flight cases posted by Rick Denney on September 19, 2003 at 11:23:59:
Rick, I don't know where you've bought your tires, but it's been more-or-less standard practice to make bicycle road tires with a smooth raised center ridge for more than 30 years (really cheap tires excepted). My favorite tandem tires (before they were discontinued, what, 20 years ago?) were the 1 1/4" Schwinn R-50's with a very pronounced smooth center ridge. I can see the utility of a tread pattern on the outer edges of the road-contact surface when attempting to navigate through sand or loose soil (I can tell you a great story about dodging road construction equipment on a 3 mile (then) dirt stretch of higway 88 in the Sierras). And I can see where a tread pattern would be useful on off-road tires, but a hindrance for road use.
But that's not where I need disabuse.
It would seem to me that any tuba case that suspended the bell of a tuba in open air would need to have some ultra-reliable way of holding onto the body of the horn. I can picture the mayhem that would result if one's Pride and Joy ever broke loose from such a mounting.
If the case wall were in close proximity to any part of the bell, then one would need to ensure that the case itself would not deform, lest the wall of the case forcibly contact the bell.
Given that the bell is affixed to the body of the tuba and doesn't move independently, what could be more secure than bundling the entire horn in some nice form-fitting resilient material, such as foam? The foam adds to the structural integrity of the case, thereby obviating the need to beef up the case around the bell. And it very securely constrains the entire tuba, making movement independent of the case impossible.
It's not that I don't think that your "suspended bell" idea isn't worthwhile, but that between designing a secure mount for the body of the instrument and beefing up the bell end of the case (or leaving enough space around it to allow for a certain amount of wall flexure) one would end up with something that would scarcely be better than the fully-constrained approach.
And that's where I need to be disabused. Forgive this non-ME, but I just don't get it.