X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 08:11:45 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from web33905.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.69.183] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.12) with SMTP id 3512946 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 00:00:10 -0500 Received: (qmail 17563 invoked by uid 60001); 24 Feb 2009 05:00:09 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; b=i3ScXwRKlpprKE+kXhfJLbKDA15WslE3UEsaQHCo17FP0lOu6T4Rh9nym5JNryYQ1jkDC+E5vKc5AB0UeBvEEpzKsPmEXiktUznwk6sA/8JAi7d+H4CWl0mjefoYi74TtOcKLfyIILZlUaP7eaO8p+ISCcMz2OjWDHGBgUw4Aeg=; X-YMail-OSG: XbF4pcgVM1nSULVVBBmAUMBTCvm9bqnKowY4zOBqLLqsC1hw5fRm4xleoPON60cg.ZCEnhOAQQW10zRADWUS8pIlrTQ0VddsLP72tUES92BGxYF5S.391Kscm4WK.JuCeJy7MGykGJYJ2RFRZFdb9odJ94sRYYac7KejFlOqiiGhfGHdGkNf32MH8HOcQ98fn5IPE8NTqwiNRQ1b0QTogkdySQ-- Received: from [71.208.12.1] by web33905.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 23 Feb 2009 21:00:05 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.289.1 X-Original-Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 21:00:05 -0800 (PST) From: Bill Hannahan Reply-To: wfhannahan@yahoo.com Subject: 360 in a small-tail LNC2? X-Original-To: MAIL LANCAIR MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1635735222-1235451605=:91963" X-Original-Message-ID: <884040.91963.qm@web33905.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --0-1635735222-1235451605=:91963 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Grayhawk, =C2=A0 Please note that he said; =C2=A0 =E2=80=9CThe elevator bob weight was below the horizontal (elevator up, nose pitch up)=C2=A0with flaps all the way up.=E2=80=9D =C2=A0 That implies nose up trim not down trim. Regards, Bill Hannahan =20 wfhannahan@yahoo.com --- On Mon, 2/23/09, Sky2high@aol.com wrote: From: Sky2high@aol.com Subject: [LML] Re: 360 in a small-tail LNC2? To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Monday, February 23, 2009, 7:51 PM =20 Craig, =C2=A0 Uh, I believe you are flying high=C2=A0in the ASI yellow arc all the=20 time.=C2=A0 That is quite beyond the max=C2=A0cruise design speed of about = 180=20 KIAS and should require the extra trim you mention. =C2=A0 BTW, mine runs out of down trim at 200 KIAS - so I push on the stick a bit= =20 when racing.=C2=A0 I suppose I could add a bungee cord from the firewall to= the=20 stick for added trim.=C2=A0 Gee, I run out of left rudder trim also. =C2=A0 Anyone that put an engine with greater than the design HP should expect to= =20 consider, uh, trim adjustments since =C2=A0the design envelope has been pus= hed=20 beyond standard limits......... =C2=A0 Grayhawk =C2=A0 In a message dated 2/23/2009 5:17:00 P.M. Central Standard Time,=20 craig@skybolt.net writes: Hi=20 Larry, I think you are right about the incidence being wrong in a lot=20 of these airplanes.=C2=A0 Mine will run out of down trim over 210=20 kts.=C2=A0 A quick look back and I can see the elevator counterbalance=20 sticking up about 3/8 inch.=C2=A0 My CG is perfectly to spec but at 210+ it=20 doesn't seem to matter how the airplane is loaded.=C2=A0 It still needs=20 gobs of down trim.=C2=A0 The problem is the faster the airplane goes the=20 more lift the wing wants to create.=C2=A0 So to keep the airplane flying=20 level you have to reduce the angle of attack, that means down trim.=C2=A0 A=20 full flying horizontal stab would be the most efficient way around=20 this.=C2=A0=20 Craig Schulze Lancair 320 small=20 tail. -----Original Message----- From: LHenney=20 [mailto:LHenney@charter.net]=20 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.=C2=A0 Similarly I was assessing elevator bob weight=20 position relative to the horizontal tail at race speeds and comparing=20 airspeed data.=C2=A0=20 In my aircraft, your premise would be=20 wrong.=C2=A0 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 hard=20 to believe)).=C2=A0 As opposed to changing CG, one might verify horizontal=20 tail incidence.=C2=A0 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 phrase=20 " way to far forward I think" has me squirming. Larry=20 Henney PS: In my estimation, several 320/ 360 builders took the tail=20 plane template and transferred it to an incidence guide.=C2=A0 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.=C2=A0=20 The mistake is missing the fact that the incidence guide off the blue print=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.=C2=A0 Many are=20 actually 1 deg nose down.=C2=A0 This is not a problem.=C2=A0 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]=20 Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 12:51=20 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: RE:360 in a small-tail=20 LNC2? Works great.=C2=A0 I have a 400!=C2=A0 I'm sure the rest of=20 small tail group would agree.=C2=A0 Might have to move your center of=20 gravity back. (I need to)=C2=A0 Only thing I can say is that slow flight=20 with full flaps isn't the most comfortable, but now that I am aware of how=20 it=C2=A0handles, doesn't bother me a bit.=C2=A0 My CG is way to far forward=20 I think, so that probably makes the slow flight a little=20 different. On a side note..=C2=A0=C2=A0 I turned around and looked at=20 the tail the other=C2=A0day while indicating 200KTS.=C2=A0 I could see the=20 elevator counter weight, or almost all of it.=C2=A0 I didn't expect to see=20 that at 200.=C2=A0 Maybe 100..=C2=A0 haha=C2=A0 This leads me to believe=20 that I have a forward center of gravity.=C2=A0 The big engine would explain=20 that.=C2=A0 Once I get=C2=A0the plane=C2=A0on some scales, the only thing= =20 I can think of is to move=C2=A0the battery.=C2=A0 My battery is behind the=20 passenger seat. Has anyone mounted a battery behind the baggage=20 compartment?=C2=A0 Advice? Thanks Tom www.N54SG.com=20 =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!=0A= =0A=0A --0-1635735222-1235451605=:91963 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Grayhawk,

 

Please note that he said;

 

=E2=80=9CThe elevator bob weight was below the horizontal (elevator up, nose pitch up) with flaps all the way up.=E2=80=9D

 

That implies nose up trim not down trim.



Regards,
Bill Hannahan


--- On Mon, 2/23/09, Sky2high@aol.com <= Sky2high@aol.com> wrote:
From: Sky2h= igh@aol.com <Sky2high@aol.com>
Subject: [LML] Re: 360 in a small-t= ail LNC2?
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Monday, February 23, 2009, = 7:51 PM

=20
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 = 180=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= bit=20 when racing.  I suppose I could add a bungee cord from the firewall to= 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 expec= t to=20 consider, uh, trim adjustments since  the design envelope has been pus= hed=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:
Hi=20 Larry,

I think you are right about the incidence being wrong in a = lot=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 21= 0+ it=20 doesn't seem to matter how the airplane
is loaded.  It still need= s=20 gobs of down trim.  The problem is the faster the
airplane goes t= he=20 more lift the wing wants to create.  So to keep the
airplane flyi= ng=20 level you have to reduce the angle of attack, that means
down trim.&nb= sp; 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= hard=20 to believe)).  As opposed to changing CG, one
might verify horizo= ntal=20 tail incidence.  Or more precisely all Lancair 320/
360 I've flow= n=20 with have this same affect (bob weights a little high at
least=20 minimally).

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

Larry=20 Henney

PS: In my estimation, several 320/ 360 builders took the ta= il=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.&n= bsp;=20 The mistake is missing the fact that
the incidence guide off the blue = print=20 was already 1/2 degree nose down.
Thus reading 0 deg on the smart leve= l=20 should have had the tail at the 1/2
degree nose down angle.  Many= 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= 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 flig= ht=20 with full flaps isn't the most
comfortable, but now that I am aware of= how=20 it handles, doesn't bother me a
bit.  My CG is way to far fo= rward=20 I think, so that probably makes the slow
flight a little=20 different.

On a side note..   I turned around and looked= at=20 the tail the other day
while indicating 200KTS.  I could see= the=20 elevator counter weight, or almost
all of it.  I didn't expect to= see=20 that at 200.  Maybe 100..  haha  This
leads me to belie= ve=20 that I have a forward center of gravity.  The big engine
would ex= plain=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= 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
<= /div>
A Good Credit Score is 700 or= Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps!

=0A=0A=0A=0A --0-1635735222-1235451605=:91963--