X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 23:41:31 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from bay0-omc2-s22.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.158] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c4) with ESMTP id 2649592 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:13:16 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.54.246.158; envelope-from=joscales98@hotmail.com Received: from hotmail.com ([65.55.135.18]) by bay0-omc2-s22.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:12:35 -0800 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:12:35 -0800 X-Original-Message-ID: Received: from 75.81.226.134 by BAY130-DAV8.phx.gbl with DAV; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:12:32 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [75.81.226.134] X-Originating-Email: [joscales98@hotmail.com] X-Sender: joscales98@hotmail.com From: "Jim Scales" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Gap seals X-Original-Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:12:33 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003F_01C858F9.DBD8F930" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: MSN 9 X-MimeOLE: Produced By MSN MimeOLE V9.50.0039.1900 Seal-Send-Time: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:12:33 -0600 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Jan 2008 17:12:35.0397 (UTC) FILETIME=[275E1750:01C8592C] X-Original-Return-Path: joscales98@hotmail.com This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003F_01C858F9.DBD8F930 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have had the glider style "Venetian blind" shaped gap seals on my ES = for several years. I installed them to increase the effectiveness of my = ailerons. =20 They do increase the effectiveness as intended. I have them also on my = horizontal stab. I would say there probably is none to very little increase in = performance. Jim Scales ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Richard T. Schaefer=20 To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 5:00 AM Subject: [LML] Re: Gap seals I would expect that there would be a little more aileron = effectiveness.=20 -----Original Message----- From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of billhogarty Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 12:46 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Re: Gap seals Does anyone have any before and after performance data using gap seals = on a L-IV???. Regards, Bill Hogarty -- For archives and unsub = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html -- For archives and unsub = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_003F_01C858F9.DBD8F930 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have had the glider style "Venetian blind" shaped gap seals on my = ES for=20 several years.  I installed them to increase the effectiveness of = my=20 ailerons. 
 
They do increase the effectiveness as intended.  I have them = also on=20 my horizontal stab.
 
I would say there probably is none to very little increase in=20 performance.
 
Jim Scales
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard T. Schaefer =
Sent: Thursday, January 17, = 2008 5:00=20 AM
Subject: [LML] Re: Gap = seals

I would expect that there would be a little more = aileron=20 effectiveness.

-----Original Message-----
From: Lancair = Mailing=20 List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf = Of
billhogarty
Sent:=20 Wednesday, January 16, 2008 12:46 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subjec= t:=20 [LML] Re: Gap seals

Does anyone have any before and after = performance=20 data using gap seals
on a L-IV???.

Regards,  Bill=20 Hogarty

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


--
For=20 archives and unsub http://mail= lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
------=_NextPart_000_003F_01C858F9.DBD8F930--