X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: "Marvin Kaye" To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:46:25 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mxsf20.cluster1.charter.net ([209.225.28.220] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c4) with ESMTP id 866161 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 11:36:52 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.225.28.220; envelope-from=farnsworth@charter.net Received: from mxip17.cluster1.charter.net (mxip17a.cluster1.charter.net [209.225.28.147]) by mxsf20.cluster1.charter.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j3CFa6gf014305 for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 11:36:06 -0400 Received: from 68-114-24-98.cpe.ga.charter.com (HELO Farnsworth) (68.114.24.98) by mxip17.cluster1.charter.net with SMTP; 12 Apr 2005 11:36:07 -0400 X-Ironport-AV: i="3.92,96,1112587200"; d="scan'217,208"; a="1006340750:sNHT37195638" From: "Farnsworth" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" Subject: RE: [LML] Re: Engine Failure X-Original-Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 11:36:50 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_01C53F53.EAFCF910" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C53F53.EAFCF910 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think Shannon passed up two airports nearby to go to Dane County The actual number of airports that were closer to the location of the engine failure than the chosen destination airport was in the double digits, not just two. The reason I brought up Shannon's accident was not to say anything unkind , but to say, that is what made me start thinking about glide rations with feathering and non feathering propellers. The glide performance gain with the feathering prop is significant enough to warrant serious consideration over a non feathering prop. This performance gain increases your options. Shannon, obviously, would have been better served to pick a different airport. However, if he had had a feathering prop, the selected airport would have been within the range of the airplane, and, I believe, the outcome would have been happy. Though the cost is slightly higher, I say again, a feathering prop is inexpensive insurance! Lynn Farnsworth Super Legacy #235 (flying) TSIO-550 Race #44 ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C53F53.EAFCF910 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
I think Shannon passed up two airports nearby to go to Dane=20 County
The actual number of airports that were closer to the location of = the=20 engine failure than the chosen destination airport was in the double = digits,=20 not just two.  

The reason I brought up = Shannon's accident was=20 not to say anything unkind , but to say, that is what made me start = thinking=20 about glide rations with feathering and non feathering=20 propellers. 
The = glide=20 performance gain with the feathering prop is significant enough to = warrant=20 serious consideration over a non feathering prop. This = performance gain=20 increases your options.
Shannon, obviously, would have been = better=20 served to pick a different airport. However, if he had had a = feathering=20 prop, the selected airport would have been within the range of the = airplane,=20 and, I believe, the outcome would have been=20 happy.  
Though = the cost is=20 slightly higher, I say again, a feathering prop is = inexpensive=20 insurance! 
Lynn=20 Farnsworth
Super Legacy #235=20 (flying)
TSIO-550
Race=20 #44 
------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C53F53.EAFCF910--