From: RWolf99@aol.com
Message-ID: <bd.8408831.272a7e7c@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 02:45:16 EDT
Subject: Big Tail and CG
To: lancair.list@olsusa.com
Reply-To: lancair.list@olsusa.com
Mime-Version: 1.0

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>
I was talking with Doug Shane the other day.  He's a test pilot and VP at 
Scaled Composites in Mojave.  He told me that he had the opportunity to fly a 
360 with a small tail, and then fly the same airplane again when a larger 
tail was retrofit after a landing mishap.  He said there was a significantly 
lower workload with the big tail, and while theory and numbers told an 
interesting story, it's really the pilot workload that's the proof of the 
pudding (or words to that effect).

He further commented that, oddly enough, switching to the big tail increased 
the "apparent" stability in the directional axis.  He knows that the two are 
unconnected but said that he didn't have enough mental bandwidth to properly 
fly the airplane in the directional axis with the small tail's higher 
workload in the pitch axis.  When the workload went down with the bigger 
tail, it was easier to keep it straight.

I have no idea what the wind conditions or CGs were for those flights.  I 
know there's a lot of happy small-tail pilots out there.  I have next to no 
experience actually flying a Lancair.  I'm not saying small or big tails are 
good or bad.  I'm just relaying a story here that y'all might find 
interesting.  If there's any other disclaimers I need, I'll post them 
tomorrow...

- Rob Wolf
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LML website:   http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html
LML Builders' Bookstore:   http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair

Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>