Here is some additional clarification regarding 235 airframes.

 

The flap reflex amount is -8 degrees (not -7 degrees as stated on the LML) as per the builders manual page 236, figure 228.  The down flap amount is +23 degrees (not +25 degrees as stated on the LML), same manual page and figure. So really there is a total of 32 degrees available….in the hanger. (more on that later)

 

The +23 degrees down flap maximum amount (+ or - a little for different builders) was because of the lower flap rolled leading edge being in conflict with the rear spar at full down travel.  Hence the reason for the change from upper skin hinge to lower skin hinge on the 320/360 models so as to get 30 or 40 degrees.  As Earl has done, some 235 builders built lower hinged flaps.  My compliments to Earl and others as it is a lot of extra work.

 

The +23 degrees is most likely only attainable on the ground.  In flight, in the pattern, it is likely only about +19 degrees.  This is as a result of up pressure in flight pushing on the flap system "slop" and overall flexing of the flaps.  I see this situation on every flight with my digital flap indicator.

 

As does Earl and others, I cruise fly with about -4 degrees reflex ( 3/4 inch up from neutral) as Don G. had suggested.  Less twist (strain) in the wing as I was told.  Also other 235ers have indicated, some on the LML, that their best cruise speeds are with this partial up reflex. 

 

The 235 and 320 tails are NOT exactly the same.  The 235 vertical  stab. and rudder are smaller than the 320/360.  As a result, they are marginal on takeoff with a 320 up front.  Hence the reason several builders opted to build the ventral fin on the bottom of the fuselage and add the same amount to the bottom of the rudder as Earl did.  It adds about 15% more rudder area.  It also helps take some of the wiggle out of the tail in flight. (shorter fuselage length on 235 than 320/360)  The 235 horiz. stab., although the same physical size, does not have an interior front spar like the 320/360 unless the builders chose to install them as I and others did.  Also, as JJ indicated, there is an additional rib in the tail cone on the 320/360 that is not in the 235.

 

The wings on the 235 are the same as the 320/360 except for the tips.  The fuel capacity was increased in the 320/360 for obvious reasons; bigger engine = higher fuel burn.  33 gallons in the 235 wasn't enough for 320/360 engines.  As others stated, more fuel capacity was added.

 

Now we get to the good part; gross weight.

 

Lancair raised the gross weight on 235's from: 1400# 

                                                         to: 1500# on take off, 1400# on landing. 

So let's look at an example.

 

235 aircraft weight with 320 engine:         1025# (+ some with an electric prop?)

33 gallons of fuel (standard construction):  198# (some builders have >50 gallons, so + 102# more?)

Pilot/passenger:                                     360# (I wish)

Baggage (for 2)                                       35# (I wish)

 

Total                                                   1618#

 

So, WITHOUT fuel, the 235 above is 20# over gross on landing.  Add the fuel and extras and the gross is over 1700#. (makes for interesting approaches and landings with a fixed pitched prop)

 

As Scott mentioned, that is why they are called "experiMENTAL".  Each builder can set their own gross weight based on their own comfort (risk) level and possible ramp check level. 

 

Now before I go for a ride in your plane, first let me ask you about your…………..

 

Gary Edwards

LNC2 N21SN