X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 21:51:14 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-d21.mx.aol.com ([205.188.144.207] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.12) with ESMTP id 3512645 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:50:55 -0500 Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-d21.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v39.1.) id q.bf3.4e756254 (39952) for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:50:52 -0500 (EST) From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:50:52 EST Subject: Re: [LML] Re: 360 in a small-tail LNC2? X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1235433052" X-Mailer: AOL 9.1 sub 5003 X-Spam-Flag:NO -------------------------------1235433052 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Craig, Uh, I believe you are flying high in the ASI yellow arc all the time. That is quite beyond the max cruise design speed of about 180 KIAS and should require the extra trim you mention. BTW, mine runs out of down trim at 200 KIAS - so I push on the stick a bit when racing. I suppose I could add a bungee cord from the firewall to the stick for added trim. Gee, I run out of left rudder trim also. Anyone that put an engine with greater than the design HP should expect to consider, uh, trim adjustments since the design envelope has been pushed beyond standard limits......... Grayhawk In a message dated 2/23/2009 5:17:00 P.M. Central Standard Time, craig@skybolt.net writes: Hi Larry, I think you are right about the incidence being wrong in a lot of these airplanes. Mine will run out of down trim over 210 kts. A quick look back and I can see the elevator counterbalance sticking up about 3/8 inch. My CG is perfectly to spec but at 210+ it doesn't seem to matter how the airplane is loaded. It still needs gobs of down trim. The problem is the faster the airplane goes the more lift the wing wants to create. So to keep the airplane flying level you have to reduce the angle of attack, that means down trim. A full flying horizontal stab would be the most efficient way around this. Craig Schulze Lancair 320 small tail. -----Original Message----- From: LHenney [mailto:LHenney@charter.net] Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 2:36 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: FW: 360 in a small-tail LNC2? Tom, I had occasion to visit my CG limits for a son's science project. Similarly I was assessing elevator bob weight position relative to the horizontal tail at race speeds and comparing airspeed data. In my aircraft, your premise would be wrong. That is, I have to move the CG forward to flatten out the elevators to the horizontal tail (which also increases speed (yes it's hard to believe)). As opposed to changing CG, one might verify horizontal tail incidence. Or more precisely all Lancair 320/ 360 I've flown with have this same affect (bob weights a little high at least minimally). Regarding your CG comments, serious pursuit of empty CG before any additional flight would be my recommendation (imho). The phrase " way to far forward I think" has me squirming. Larry Henney PS: In my estimation, several 320/ 360 builders took the tail plane template and transferred it to an incidence guide. The subsequent mistake was mounting one's smart level atop the guide and setting the tail plane at the requisite 1/4 to 1/2 degree nose down. The mistake is missing the fact that the incidence guide off the blue print was already 1/2 degree nose down. Thus reading 0 deg on the smart level should have had the tail at the 1/2 degree nose down angle. Many are actually 1 deg nose down. This is not a problem. It just increases stability and costs 2-3 kts. Just my 2 cents. -----Original Message----- From: Tom McNerney [mailto:dudewanarace@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 12:51 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: RE:360 in a small-tail LNC2? Works great. I have a 400! I'm sure the rest of small tail group would agree. Might have to move your center of gravity back. (I need to) Only thing I can say is that slow flight with full flaps isn't the most comfortable, but now that I am aware of how it handles, doesn't bother me a bit. My CG is way to far forward I think, so that probably makes the slow flight a little different. On a side note.. I turned around and looked at the tail the other day while indicating 200KTS. I could see the elevator counter weight, or almost all of it. I didn't expect to see that at 200. Maybe 100.. haha This leads me to believe that I have a forward center of gravity. The big engine would explain that. Once I get the plane on some scales, the only thing I can think of is to move the battery. My battery is behind the passenger seat. Has anyone mounted a battery behind the baggage compartment? Advice? Thanks Tom www.N54SG.com -- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html **************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1218822736x1201267884/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID %3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62) -------------------------------1235433052 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Craig,
 
Uh, I believe you are flying high in the ASI yellow arc all the=20 time.  That is quite beyond the max cruise design speed of about 1= 80=20 KIAS and should require the extra trim you mention.
 
BTW, mine runs out of down trim at 200 KIAS - so I push on the stick a=20= bit=20 when racing.  I suppose I could add a bungee cord from the firewall to=20= the=20 stick for added trim.  Gee, I run out of left rudder trim also.
 
Anyone that put an engine with greater than the design HP should expect= to=20 consider, uh, trim adjustments since  the design envelope has been push= ed=20 beyond standard limits.........
 
Grayhawk
 
In a message dated 2/23/2009 5:17:00 P.M. Central Standard Time,=20 craig@skybolt.net writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>Hi=20 Larry,

I think you are right about the incidence being wrong in a l= ot=20 of these
airplanes.  Mine will run out of down trim over 210=20 kts.  A quick look back
and I can see the elevator counterbalance=20 sticking up about 3/8 inch.  My CG
is perfectly to spec but at 210= + it=20 doesn't seem to matter how the airplane
is loaded.  It still needs= =20 gobs of down trim.  The problem is the faster the
airplane goes th= e=20 more lift the wing wants to create.  So to keep the
airplane flyin= g=20 level you have to reduce the angle of attack, that means
down trim.&nbs= p; A=20 full flying horizontal stab would be the most efficient way
around=20 this. 

Craig Schulze
Lancair 320 small=20 tail.

-----Original Message-----
From: LHenney=20 [mailto:LHenney@charter.net]
Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2009 2:36=20 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: FW: 360 in a small-tail=20 LNC2?

Tom,

I had occasion to visit my CG limits for a son's=20 science project.  Similarly
I was assessing elevator bob weight=20 position relative to the horizontal tail
at race speeds and comparing=20 airspeed data. 

In my aircraft, your premise would be=20 wrong.  That is, I have to move the CG
forward to flatten out the=20 elevators to the horizontal tail (which also
increases speed (yes it's=20= hard=20 to believe)).  As opposed to changing CG, one
might verify horizon= tal=20 tail incidence.  Or more precisely all Lancair 320/
360 I've flown= =20 with have this same affect (bob weights a little high at
least=20 minimally).

Regarding your CG comments, serious pursuit of empty CG= =20 before any
additional flight would be my recommendation (imho). The phr= ase=20 " way to far
forward I think" has me squirming.

Larry=20 Henney

PS: In my estimation, several 320/ 360 builders took the tai= l=20 plane template
and transferred it to an incidence guide.  The=20 subsequent mistake was
mounting one's smart level atop the guide and=20 setting the tail plane at the
requisite 1/4 to 1/2 degree nose down.&nb= sp;=20 The mistake is missing the fact that
the incidence guide off the blue p= rint=20 was already 1/2 degree nose down.
Thus reading 0 deg on the smart level= =20 should have had the tail at the 1/2
degree nose down angle.  Many=20= are=20 actually 1 deg nose down.  This is not a
problem.  It just=20 increases stability and costs 2-3 kts.

Just my 2=20 cents.



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom McNerney=20 [mailto:dudewanarace@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 12:51=20 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: RE:360 in a small-tail=20 LNC2?


Works great.  I have a 400!  I'm sure the rest=20= of=20 small tail group would
agree.  Might have to move your center of=20 gravity back. (I need to)  Only
thing I can say is that slow fligh= t=20 with full flaps isn't the most
comfortable, but now that I am aware of=20= how=20 it handles, doesn't bother me a
bit.  My CG is way to far for= ward=20 I think, so that probably makes the slow
flight a little=20 different.

On a side note..   I turned around and looked=20= at=20 the tail the other day
while indicating 200KTS.  I could see=20= the=20 elevator counter weight, or almost
all of it.  I didn't expect to=20= see=20 that at 200.  Maybe 100..  haha  This
leads me to believ= e=20 that I have a forward center of gravity.  The big engine
would exp= lain=20 that.  Once I get the plane on some scales, the only thing=20 I
can think of is to move the battery.  My battery is behind=20= the=20 passenger
seat.

Has anyone mounted a battery behind the baggage=20 compartment?  Advice?

Thanks
Tom
www.N54SG.com=20




--
For archives and unsub=20 http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps!<= /a>
-------------------------------1235433052--