Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 09:20:24 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-r09.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.105] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b1) with ESMTP id 1249269 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 28 May 2002 09:00:25 -0400 Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-r09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id q.14f.e7c4bf0 (3842) for ; Tue, 28 May 2002 09:00:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <14f.e7c4bf0.2a24d968@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 09:00:24 EDT Subject: Re: [LML] Re: 320 ventilation system sucks X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10509 Bill, I was too worn out yesterday to complete some details on how the E-racer solved his lack of vent air problem. One was to introduce air exits in his aft cabin to let incoming air out. Although this was an improvement, his additional problem was that the intake NACA was located in an area of dead air. By placing 2 small vortex generators ahead of the NACA, the air flow was dramatically increased. Again, a Lancair should allow for adequate air exit thru the tunnel and elevator openings unless there is too much air coming in under the seats from the gear doors and too much leakage in the canopy seals. Perhaps some tufting to see what is going on with the air ahead of the NACA and maybe even using relatively small vortex generators might make the difference. If you are in an experimentation mode, and you have an "alternate static air" valve using cockpit air, you may want to open it at high and low speed flight (including gear down) and calculate the pressure differences from the change in indicated altitude. Scott Krueger N92EX