Engine Rule/Bike Design

I've heard plenty of questions about the possibility of engines swallowing gravel but I have yet to hear any discussion (on TV or in the press) about the impact the engine rules will have on swingarm design. During the end of the 990 era some of manufacturers were bolting the swingarm directly to the engine casing. If you chuck it down the road and the swingarm damages the engine casing, what is the ruling? Is anyone still using the engine as a stressed member?

Thoughts?

Ducati has been using the stressed engine for a bit. Yamaha/Kawasaki were very conventional.
I don't know about Honda and Suzuki, but I doubt it given their design philosophies.

IMO, it's pretty stupid. Aprilia built a brand new bike with an unstressed, adjustable position engine.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Oct 11 2009, 07:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I've heard plenty of questions about the possibility of engines swallowing gravel but I have yet to hear any discussion (on TV or in the press) about the impact the engine rules will have on swingarm design. During the end of the 990 era some of manufacturers were bolting the swingarm directly to the engine casing. If you chuck it down the road and the swingarm damages the engine casing, what is the ruling? Is anyone still using the engine as a stressed member?

Thoughts?

I don't know about the others but Ducati have no less than four separate "frame" members in the '09 bike:
Head stock and engine mounts, seat frame bolted to the engine and partly supported by the exhaust, swing arm bolted to the engine and finally the central member tying it all together: the engine.

i think most modern race bikes use the engine as a stressed member, whether using just the engine to bolt the swing arm to or going through the frame and engine casings. the bike would not be compact enough without doing this plus the flex issues.