X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:01:23 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nk11p08mm-asmtp001.mac.com ([17.158.58.246] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTP id 6004775 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 10 Jan 2013 11:05:28 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=17.158.58.246; envelope-from=gw5@me.com MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_bbi7GC3u7WjqdURbd8I2aw)" Received: from [10.55.210.255] (216-147-135-217.globalsat.net [216.147.135.217]) by nk11p08mm-asmtp001.mac.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-26.01(7.0.4.26.0) 64bit (built Jul 13 2012)) with ESMTPSA id <0MGF00LOT3BLL790@nk11p08mm-asmtp001.mac.com> for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 10 Jan 2013 16:04:47 +0000 (GMT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.9.8327,1.0.431,0.0.0000 definitions=2013-01-10_07:2013-01-10,2013-01-10,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=6.0.2-1203120001 definitions=main-1301100118 From: George Wehrung X-Original-Message-id: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Stalls & Spins X-Original-Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 20:34:32 +0430 References: X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List In-reply-to: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) --Boundary_(ID_bbi7GC3u7WjqdURbd8I2aw) Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable John, It seems they have taken down the videos. George On Jan 10, 2013, at 5:45 AM, John Smith wrote: > Hi George, >=20 > I originally downloaded the videos from a link proved to me by = Lancair. I've been trying it (see below) but the link is not valid =96 = so I'm guessing the videos may have been removed. But have a try = yourself =96 may work for you? I have the 5 videos (all of the Legacy = FG) totalling 230MB. Not emailable =96 but I can upload them somewhere = via FTP if you like =96 can use Skype for this, or other tools like = coreFTP etc=85 just let me know and we'll make it happen somehow. >=20 > Below is what I was provided with in early 2009. >=20 > The cuffs improve the stall characteristics greatly. Take a look at = the following: > =20 > www.lancair.com/legacy_cuff_test > =20 > Effectively, these tests are full aft stick limited deep stalls with = flaps up, take off, down, 30 degree bank, and power on. The tests were = conducted in some pretty bumpy conditions. There was no more than 5 = degree roll off without power and less than 10 degree roll off with = power. > =20 > These tests were not conducted with the ventral. We are not looking = to extend the rudder as of now. We are still investigating this though. >=20 >=20 >=20 > Regards, >=20 > John >=20 >=20 > John N G Smith > Tel / fax: +61-8-9385-8891 > Mobile: +61-409-372-975 > Email: john@jjts.net.au >=20 >=20 > From: George Wehrung > Reply-To: Lancair Mailing List > Date: Tuesday, 8 January 2013 9:34 PM > To: > Subject: [LML] Re: Stalls & Spins >=20 > John,=20 >=20 > I would be interested in watching some of the videos on the ES in = particular if not the other airframes. Are they posted on the Internet = by chance, doubtful but I thought I'd ask. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > Sent from my iPhone >=20 > On Jan 8, 2013, at 15:50, John Smith wrote: >=20 >> =46rom my perspective, the key phrase is spin resistance. >>=20 >> Having researched the NASA material and having also seen the Lancair = videos of actual flight testing, rightly or wrongly, I installed the = wing cuffs to the Legacy on the basis that they seemed to offer the = opportunity to make it harder to get into trouble, but accepting that if = pushed too far into a spin, then the aircraft may or may not be = recoverable. So, if one accepts the view of many which is that "as was", = the aircraft was not spin recoverable, there would only appear to be = upside from installing the cuffs. The flaw is, of course, that if indeed = the Legacy is spin recoverable without wing cuffs, then the addition of = the wing cuffs may preclude spin recovery! >>=20 >> Unless someone goes to the trouble of spin testing the Legacy, or any = other type fitted with cuffs, one will never know whether spin = recoveries are possible under what flight and loading circumstances and, = of course, with or without wing cuffs. >>=20 >> Meanwhile, per my prior post on this, all I can say is that the = albeit very limited flight testing (straight and level, and continuous = 30deg AoB turns) in my Legacy fitted with the cuffs shows that there is = plenty of warning of the impending stall =96 stall strips give the first = "gentle" warning", followed by the more severe intermittent "shuddering" = as the centre section drops in and out of the stall (whilst the outboard = sections are still flying). >>=20 >> I'm happy to talk to anyone if they are interested to talk about this = more=85. numbers below, but please note time is UTC + 8!! >>=20 >>=20 >> Regards, >>=20 >> John >>=20 >>=20 >> John N G Smith >> Tel / fax: +61-8-9385-8891 >> Mobile: +61-409-372-975 >> Email: john@jjts.net.au >>=20 >>=20 >> From: >> Reply-To: Lancair Mailing List >> Date: Tuesday, 8 January 2013 2:25 AM >> To: >> Subject: [LML] Re: Stalls & Spins >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> Posted for "Peter Field" : >>=20 >> Dear Lancair Drivers: >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> I've been following the discussion on stalls and spins and I want to = add >> some additional factual information purely for your personal = consumption and >> reflection. Attached are excerpts from 10 different 1980-90 NASA = flight >> test final reports on a series of GA airplanes in which NASA = evaluated the >> use of cuffs on leading edges to improve the behavior of the test = airplane >> approaching the stall. For various reasons the cuffs improved = lateral >> control entering the stall, but had the adverse effect of = destabilizing the >> aircraft once a fully developed spin was achieved. Essentially, = stall >> behavior was improved at the sacrifice of spin recovery. Cuffs on = wing >> leading edges are an add on design fix, the more elegant solution is >> "washout," where the wing is twisted so the outer portions of the = wing >> always operate at a lower angle of attack. >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> To my knowledge, Lancair has never subjected any of their aircraft to = a >> fully developed spin matrix complete with appropriate instrumentation = and a >> spin recovery chute. There is no FAA requirement for them to do so - = it's >> an Experimental Category airplane. Early on they may have lightly = touched >> on such testing; but I have never seen any documentation on a fully >> completed spin matrix, which would involve at least 160 spins at = various >> cg's and lateral loadings. In my opinion, it would be highly risky = to fool >> around much beyond the stall in any Lancair - there is no = documentation that >> indicates any of these airplanes can always be recovered from a one = turn >> incipient phase spin or any fully developed spin. Being good at spin >> recovery isn't so much a matter of how skillful a pilot you are, it's = a >> matter of how many spins you've experienced in airplanes known to be >> recoverable. Being familiar with the stall characteristics of your = own >> airplane should be a matter of personal preference. =20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> Best regards,=20 >>=20 >> Pete Field (LNC2) >>=20 >> USNTPS graduate & spin recovery instructor >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> -- For archives and unsub = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html --Boundary_(ID_bbi7GC3u7WjqdURbd8I2aw) Content-type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable john@jjts.net.au> = wrote:
Hi = George,

I originally downloaded the videos from = a link proved to me by Lancair. I've been trying it (see below) but the = link is not valid =96 so I'm guessing the videos may have been removed. = But have a try yourself =96 may work for you?  I have the 5 videos = (all of the Legacy FG) totalling 230MB. Not emailable =96 but I can = upload them somewhere via FTP if you like =96 can use Skype for this, or = other tools like coreFTP etc=85 just let me know and we'll make it = happen somehow.

Below is what I was provided = with in early 2009.


From: George Wehrung <gw5@me.com>
Reply-To: Lancair Mailing List <lml@lancaironline.net>
Date: Tuesday, 8 January 2013 9:34 = PM
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
Subject: [LML] Re: Stalls & = Spins

John, 

I would be = interested in watching some of the videos on the ES in particular if not = the other airframes. Are they posted on the Internet by chance, doubtful = but I thought I'd = ask.




Sent from my = iPhone

On Jan 8, 2013, at 15:50, John Smith <john@jjts.net.au> = wrote:

=46rom my = perspective, the key phrase is spin = resistance.

Having researched the NASA = material and having also seen the Lancair videos of actual flight = testing, rightly or wrongly, I installed the wing cuffs to the Legacy on = the basis that they seemed to offer the opportunity to make it harder to = get into trouble, but accepting that if pushed too far into a spin, then = the aircraft may or may not be recoverable. So, if one accepts = the view of many which is that "as was", the aircraft was not spin = recoverable, there would only appear to be upside from installing the = cuffs. The flaw is, of course, that if indeed the Legacy is spin = recoverable without wing cuffs, then the addition of the wing cuffs = may preclude spin recovery!

Unless = someone goes to the trouble of spin testing the Legacy, or any other = type fitted with cuffs, one will never know whether spin recoveries are = possible under what flight and loading circumstances and, of course, = with or without wing cuffs.

Meanwhile, per my = prior post on this, all I can say is that the albeit very limited flight = testing (straight and level, and continuous 30deg AoB turns) in my = Legacy fitted with the cuffs shows that there is plenty of warning of = the impending stall =96 stall strips give the first "gentle" warning", = followed by the more severe intermittent "shuddering" as the centre = section drops in and out of the stall (whilst the outboard sections are = still flying).

I'm happy to talk to anyone if = they are interested to talk about this more=85. numbers below, but = please note time is UTC + = 8!!


Regards,

John
John N G Smith
Tel / fax:    +61-8-9385-8891
Mobile:      +61-409-372-975
Email:         john@jjts.net.au

=

From: <marv@lancair.net>
Reply-To: Lancair Mailing List <lml@lancaironline.net>
Date: Tuesday, 8 January 2013 2:25 = AM
To: <lml>
Subject: [LML] Re: Stalls & = Spins



Posted for "Peter Field" <pfield.avn@gmail.com>:

= Dear Lancair Drivers:



I've been following the = discussion on stalls and spins and I want to add
some additional = factual information purely for your personal consumption and
= reflection.  Attached are excerpts from 10 different 1980-90 = NASA flight
test final reports on a series of GA airplanes in which NASA evaluated = the
use of cuffs on leading edges to improve the behavior of the = test airplane
approaching the stall.  For various reasons the = cuffs improved lateral
control entering the stall, but had the = adverse effect of destabilizing the
aircraft once a fully developed spin was = achieved.  Essentially, stall
behavior was improved at the sacrifice of spin recovery.  Cuffs on wing
leading edges = are an add on design fix, the more elegant solution is
"washout," = where the wing is twisted so the outer portions of the wing
always operate at = a lower angle of attack.



To my knowledge, Lancair has = never subjected any of their aircraft to a
fully developed spin matrix = complete with appropriate instrumentation and a
spin recovery chute.  There is no FAA requirement for them to do so - = it's
an Experimental Category airplane.  Early on they may = have lightly touched
on such testing; but I have never seen any = documentation on a fully
completed spin matrix, which would involve = at least 160 spins at various
cg's and lateral loadings.  In my = opinion, it would be highly risky to fool
around much beyond the = stall in any Lancair - there is no documentation that
indicates any of these = airplanes can always be recovered from a one turn
incipient phase = spin or any fully developed spin.  Being good at spin
recovery isn't = so much a matter of how skillful a pilot you are, it's a
matter of = how many spins you've experienced in airplanes known to be
= recoverable.  Being familiar with the stall characteristics of = your own
airplane should be a matter of personal preference.  


=
Best regards,

Pete Field (LNC2)

USNTPS graduate = & spin recovery instructor



-- For archives and unsub http://mail.= lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html

= --Boundary_(ID_bbi7GC3u7WjqdURbd8I2aw)--