X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 15:56:29 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-d04.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.36] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.9) with ESMTP id 1068359 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 14 Apr 2006 09:14:26 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.157.36; envelope-from=MikeEasley@aol.com Received: from MikeEasley@aol.com by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r7.3.) id q.3a7.5d4e3d (4426) for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2006 09:13:39 -0400 (EDT) From: MikeEasley@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <3a7.5d4e3d.3170fa03@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 09:13:39 EDT Subject: Re: [LML] IV-P Wing Incidence X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1145020419" X-Mailer: 9.0 Security Edition for Windows sub 5300 X-Spam-Flag: NO -------------------------------1145020419 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Craig, With all my issues with wing incidence on my ES, I can tell you a few tenths of a degree either way is about as good as the Lancair wing construction is capable of, and that's plenty accurate for our aircraft. From a couple discussions, the carbon IV wings are far more "stubborn" when they're closed in the jigs. The tend to spring back more than the more flexible ES wings. We had a series of ES wings closed with improperly aligned wing jigs that resulted in about 1.7 degrees more incidence at the left wingtip. Those planes still fly straight with an overall wing incidence correction. I think the numbers your dealing with are significantly less, and should have minimal effect on the flight characteristics. Even though your numbers point to a heavy left wing (more right wing incidence), it may not be enough to predict your actual flight results. The other factors, engine cant, tail feathers, torque, propeller slipstream, etc. could cancel the wing thing out and you may end up flying straight. I would be more concerned about equal incidence at the tips and equal washout than how much washout you have. And too much washout is better than too little. Symmetry is the key. If it were me, I'd fly it the way it is and see what you have before making any adjustments. Just my two cents. Mike -------------------------------1145020419 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Craig,

With all my issues with wing incidence on my ES, I can tell you a = few=20 tenths of a degree either way is about as good as the Lancair wing construct= ion=20 is capable of, and that's plenty accurate for our aircraft. From a cou= ple=20 discussions, the carbon IV wings are far more "stubborn" when they're closed= in=20 the jigs. The tend to spring back more than the more flexible ES=20 wings.

We had a series of ES wings closed with improperly aligned wing jigs th= at=20 resulted in about 1.7 degrees more incidence at the left wingtip. Thos= e=20 planes still fly straight with an overall wing incidence correction. I= =20 think the numbers your dealing with are significantly less, and should have=20 minimal effect on the flight characteristics. Even though your numbers= =20 point to a heavy left wing (more right wing incidence), it may not be enough= to=20 predict your actual flight results. The other factors, engine cant, ta= il=20 feathers, torque, propeller slipstream, etc. could cancel the wing thing out= and=20 you may end up flying straight.

I would be more concerned about equal incidence at the tips and equal=20 washout than how much washout you have. And too much washout is better= =20 than too little. Symmetry is the key. If it were me, I'd fly it=20= the=20 way it is and see what you have before making any adjustments.

Just my two cents.

Mike

-------------------------------1145020419--