X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:43:49 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-d06.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.38] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.12) with ESMTP id 3515295 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:09:14 -0500 Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-d06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v39.1.) id q.c61.41826da9 (30739) for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:09:09 -0500 (EST) From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:09:08 EST Subject: Re: [LML] 360 in a small-tail LNC2? X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1235574548" X-Mailer: AOL 9.1 sub 5003 X-Spam-Flag:NO -------------------------------1235574548 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en Yeah, that would be the wrong terminology. I think I got what he meant -=20 the elevator balance weight. =20 =20 In a message dated 2/25/2009 7:12:29 A.M. Central Standard Time, =20 wfhannahan@yahoo.com writes: _Grayhawk,=20 Please note that he said;=20 =E2=80=9CThe elevator bob weight was below the horizontal (elevator up, nos= e pitch =20 up) with flaps all the way up.=E2=80=9D=20 That implies nose up trim not down trim. Regards, Bill Hannahan wfhannahan@yahoo.com_ (mailto:wfhannahan@yahoo.com)=20 --- 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 Craig, =20 Uh, I believe you are flying high in the ASI yellow arc all the time. That= =20 is quite beyond the max cruise design speed of about 180 KIAS and should=20 require the extra trim you mention. =20 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. =20 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 pushed=20 beyond standard limits......... =20 Grayhawk =20 =20 In a message dated 2/23/2009 5:17:00 P.M. Central Standard Time, =20 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 =20= 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 th= e 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. =20 Craig Schulze Lancair 320 small tail. -----Original Message----- From: LHenney [mailto:LHenney@charter.net]=20 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. Similarl= y I was assessing elevator bob weight position relative to the horizontal tai= l at race speeds and comparing airspeed data. =20 In my aircraft, your premise would be wrong. That is, I have to move the =20= 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, on= e 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 fa= r forward I think" has me squirming. Larry Henney PS: In my estimation, several 320/ 360 builders took the tail plane templat= e 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 tha= t 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] =20 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 almo= st 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 engin= e 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 =20 -- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html =20 ____________________________________ A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. _See yours in just 2 easy steps!_=20 (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1218822736x1201267884/aol?redir=3Dh= ttp://www. freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=3D668072&hmpgID=3D62&bcd=3Dfebemailf= ooterNO6 2)=20 **************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy=20 steps!=20 (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1218822736x1201267884/aol?redir=3Dh= ttp:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgI= D %3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62) -------------------------------1235574548 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en
Yeah, that would be the wrong terminology.  I think I got what he=20 meant - the elevator balance weight.
 
In a message dated 2/25/2009 7:12:29 A.M. Central Standard Time,=20 wfhannahan@yahoo.com writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>

Grayhawk,

 

Please note tha= t he=20 said;

 

=E2=80=9CThe elevator=20 bob weight was below the horizontal (elevator up, nose pitch=20 up) with flaps all the way up.=E2=80=9D

 

That implies nose up trim not down trim.



Regards,
Bill Hannahan


--- On Mon,=20 2/23/09, Sky2high@aol.com <Sky2high@aol.com> wrote:=
From:=20 Sky2high@aol.com <Sky2high@aol.com>
Subject: [LML] Re: 36= 0 in=20 a small-tail LNC2?
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Monday,=20 February 23, 2009, 7:51 PM

Craig,
 
Uh, I believe you are flying high in the ASI yellow arc=20= all=20 the time.  That is quite beyond the max cruise design sp= eed=20 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 th= e=20 stick a bit when racing.  I suppose I could add a bungee cord= =20 from the firewall to the stick for added trim.  Gee, I run ou= t of=20 left rudder trim also.
 
Anyone that put an engine with greater than the design HP sho= uld=20 expect to consider, uh, trim adjustments since  the design=20 envelope has been pushed beyond standard limits.........
 
Grayhawk
 
In a message dated 2/23/2009 5:17:00 P.M. Central Standard Ti= me,=20 craig@skybolt.net writes:
Hi Larry,

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

Craig=20 Schulze
Lancair 320 small tail.

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

Tom,

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

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

Regarding your CG comments, serio= us=20 pursuit of empty CG before any
additional flight would be my=20 recommendation (imho). The phrase " way to far
forward I thin= k"=20 has me squirming.

Larry Henney

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

Just my 2 cents.



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


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

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

Has anyone mount= ed a=20 battery behind the baggage compartment? =20 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=20 steps!
=

A Good Credit= Score is 700 or Above. See yo= urs in just 2 easy steps! -------------------------------1235574548--