X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:16:43 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [132.241.82.183] (HELO cerberus.csuchico.edu) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c4) with ESMTPS id 2698853 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:52:36 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=132.241.82.183; envelope-from=DMccune@csuchico.edu Received: from Torrey.csuchico.edu (torrey.CSUChico.EDU [132.241.82.60]) by chimera.csuchico.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m0TMptNI004268 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:51:55 -0800 Received: from ESCHE.csuchico.edu ([132.241.82.80]) by Torrey.csuchico.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:51:55 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C862C9.8BCD37BD" Subject: RE: [LML] Re: limit Gs for 235 (kit #11) X-Original-Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 14:51:56 -0800 X-Original-Message-ID: <9ADE954C5044754C8E0BF406B5A217552622D86D@ESCHE.csuchico.edu> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [LML] Re: limit Gs for 235 (kit #11) Thread-Index: Acg2zNXwUXdmYfFoR/a+0Q9BgknYqQr/LT1g References: From: "McCune, Duane" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jan 2008 22:51:55.0608 (UTC) FILETIME=[8BF4BD80:01C862C9] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=4.65.5502:2.3.11,1.2.37,4.0.164 definitions=2008-01-29_06:2008-01-29,2008-01-29,2008-01-29 signatures=0 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C862C9.8BCD37BD Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 ________________________________ From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of terrence o'neill Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 3:24 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Re: limit Gs for 235 (kit #11) =09 =09 Scott, =20 =20 The 320/360 aileron push rod is at the inboard edge of the aileron while the 235 might have that placed further outboard. =20 =20 Yes, it is farther outboard.=20 When the ribs were installed into the wing's top skin, two BID was laid up on each side of the rib. You should be able to see this on the top skin when you look into the aileron push rod access door. If the cap strip technique was used, then the bottom skin would have pre built flanges bonded to the bottom skin and its appearance would be similar to the rib/top-skin joints.=20 =20 I'll check this next time into the aileron twilight zone ... oh boy, upside down on my back, pulling off the heated pitot tube, ageing stomach and back muscles, etc. =20 =20 Thanks for the structural info. =20 I'm making brackets for the spats now, and will put the capacitance sensor into the header next. I just re-read Chuck Berthe's Aug. '93 Kitplanes article on checking out the Lancair's flying qualities, and noted Lance's comment that he was considering an anti-servo tab for the elevator's low pilot force per G ... which he never did. But I'm glad I did. Also Chuck's slow flight test and comment ... at 100 knots, flaps up, gear down, 2500 rpm/15-in, at stall, released back pressure, the nose stayed up, and that forward pressure was required for stall recovery. I think my 'spats' will cure this, which I believe is caused by stall of the horizontal stabilizer. We'll see. It worked on the W and the Magnum. =20 Terrence O'Neill L235/320 N211AL ------_=_NextPart_001_01C862C9.8BCD37BD Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

From: Lancair Mailing List=20 [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of terrence=20 o'neill
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 3:24 = PM
To:=20 lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: limit Gs for 235 = (kit=20 #11)

Scott,

The 320/360 aileron = push rod is at=20 the inboard edge of the aileron while the 235 might have that = placed=20 further outboard.

Yes, it is farther outboard.

When the ribs were installed into the wing's top skin, two BID = was laid=20 up on each side of the rib. You should be able to see this on = the top=20 skin when you look into the aileron push rod access door. If = the cap=20 strip technique was used, then the bottom skin would have pre built = flanges=20 bonded to the bottom skin and its appearance would be similar to the = rib/top-skin joints.

I'll check this = next time=20 into the aileron twilight zone ... oh boy, upside down on my back, = pulling=20 off the heated pitot tube, ageing stomach and back muscles, = etc. =20

Thanks for the = structural=20 info.

I'm making = brackets for the=20 spats now, and will put the capacitance sensor into the header=20 next.

I just=20 re-read Chuck Berthe's Aug. '93 Kitplanes article on = checking=20 out the Lancair's flying qualities, and noted Lance's comment that = he was=20 considering an anti-servo tab for the elevator's low pilot force per = G ...=20 which he never did. But I'm glad=20 I did.

Also Chuck's = slow flight=20 test and comment ... at 100 knots, flaps up, gear down, 2500 = rpm/15-in, at=20 stall, released back pressure, the nose stayed up,=20 and that forward pressure was required for stall = recovery. I=20 think my 'spats' will cure this, which I believe is caused by stall = of the=20 horizontal stabilizer. We'll see. It worked on the W and the=20 Magnum.

Terrence=20 O'Neill

L235/320=20 N211AL

------_=_NextPart_001_01C862C9.8BCD37BD--