Sender: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 23:59:53 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-436157@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.75.162.135; envelope-from=wdodson@bak.rr.com
From: "Walter and Margo Dodson" <wdodson@bak.rr.com>
References: <004601c4a526$593e4550$6601a8c0@P43G>
Subject: Re:  IV-P wing incidence 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Pat,
  I had an issue with my wing incidence.  One wing had .3 degree more than
the other at the root.  If I measured the washout it was the same, ie., the
.3 degree difference.  In the end I did all I could to get rid of it and
succedeed in only making a tiny fraction of a degree improvement.  We, at
that time, talked about using eliptic bushings in the rear spar in order to
crank the wing to an even incidence.  My theory at the time was to use the
flaps to fix any roll problem.  That wasn't necessary and the flaps are
rigged per the book.
  As it turned out, I went with the difference and the airplane flew
perfectly and continues to be hands off with no noticable trim input to keep
wings level in flight.  Stalls are straight ahead. There is no difference in
lateral trim with changes in airspeed or power that Hal and I or the test
pilots noticed.  Neither Orin Riddell nor Al Campbell made any comment.  Hal
and I did the setup for the AOA, a non event.
  It seems this fellow has had his wings closed with one or the other not
seated in the famous laser cut jigs we used to close them at the factory.
His washout readings are terrible.  I don't think he can correct with
incidence.  As one reply stated, with airspeed change the aircraft will need
trim and will not be any good in case of a sudden stall.  He needs new wings
or at least a matching pair...
  I hope you are coming along with yours.  Gee, it sure is your turn to get
flying.
Thanks,
Walter & Margo