X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 09:41:58 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from QMTA10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.17] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3c3) with ESMTP id 4005265 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 06 Dec 2009 20:41:09 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=76.96.62.17; envelope-from=mjrav@comcast.net Received: from OMTA13.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.52]) by QMTA10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id E1Ym1d00717dt5G5A1gbym; Mon, 07 Dec 2009 01:40:35 +0000 Received: from mjr ([24.60.88.102]) by OMTA13.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id E1gZ1d0012CVLj43Z1gaQw; Mon, 07 Dec 2009 01:40:35 +0000 X-Original-Message-ID: <001001ca76de$53e95ba0$66583c18@mjr> From: "Mark Ravinski" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Vne is NOT a meaningless number X-Original-Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 20:40:59 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01CA76B4.6AED2E00" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1983 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1983 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01CA76B4.6AED2E00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I guess I'm in with you Randy and Lynn. After I bought my 360 - 14 years ago - I felt somewhat obligated and = even responsible to make sure it had sufficient margins of safety for = any circumstances before I flew with any passengers. After all, I had = not even been the one to build it. I had three greybeard mechanics look = it over very thoroughly also. A little at a time and with inspections after each flight, I increased = speed to 300 mph indicated and pulled up to 7.5 g's. I also stalled it = and made sure it would not enter some unrecoverable spin. After that, = I have not worried about it much in the course of giving rides to = literally hundreds of people. Almost all of them had the controls = during part of their flight. There is really no way to know if an experimental homebuilt will hold = together at speeds or loads even much less than the lancair factory = recommendations. Whoever flies an experimental plane is a test pilot to = some extent. I know a number of Lancairs have modified engines - such as higher = compression pistons and electronic ignitions among other things. These are not approved by Lycoming and Continental. Should they be = considered too dangerous also? May the LML police have a ball. Mark Ravinski 360 1481 hrs 1110 of it mine. X Air Force flight instructor. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Randy=20 To: LML=20 Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2009 12:32 PM Subject: [LML] Re: Vne is NOT a meaningless number Skip,=20 I don't think Lynn nor I have advocated in any way that any pilot fly = in any manor. I merely stated that I, on occasion, push my Lancair past = Vne and Lynn had stated that he pushes his Lancair past Vne. Neither one = of us has recommended anyone else to do this.=20 Since my admission I have been insulted, berated, talked down to and = pretty much left for dead. Lynn chimes in and he's treated in the same = manor.=20 I personally feel safe in my judgment, I've been flying a long time = and well versed with this model Lancair. Lynn, as well, is very = experienced with his Lancair and his judgments.=20 Why all the hate?? These are our choices, we feel safe, how did this = become everyone else's condemnation?=20 Neither Lynn nor I have asked anyone here to fly with us, we haven't = offered to train anyone to exceed Vne, we haven't promoted doing = anything...... This is a forum about Lancair's, geared to a Lancair community. We are = not all gray, we are all individuals, we all make our own choices. Not = to judged.=20 In all the years I've been on this forum I have never seen so much = disrespect towards fellow Lancair builders / pilots. All from sharing = information.=20 We were just discussing Lancair's in a Lancair forum.=20 I hope I speak for Lynn, and others that have defended our free = choice, to enjoy our Lancair's as we see fit. =20 I know everyone here on the LML wishes everyone safe flying.=20 Randy Stuart LNC-2 I need to go fly!!! ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Skip Slater=20 To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 11:01 PM Subject: [LML] Re: Vne is NOT a meaningless number Lynn, My only objection here is the cavalier disregard for limitations. = Your plane is an exception in that it was specifically modified to = race, as was Greenameyer's and the IV that Lancair raced in the early = Sport Class races in Reno (at least the engine was). Your mods make = your plane safe to fly at those speeds and you have established a higher = Vne that you respect. That's the smart way to do it. The vast majority = of the Lancairs flying don't have the airframe mods you have and their = pilots, if they choose to fly past redline IAS, have nothing upon which = to base their own limiting airspeed. I hope you're not suggesting that = they're all as safe to fly as fast as you do. If our entire community decides that limitations are just = guidelines which can be ignored, we deserve all the bad press we've been = getting. If you ignore Vne, why not ignore an RMP limit, G limit or any = other limitation you find too restrictive? It's an attitude we = shouldn't be fostering, particularly in a public forum such as the LML. If Joe B. thinks Lancair Vne's are too low, why doesn't he raise = them? If the factory endorses the raising of limits based upon their = own research and flight testing, I have no problem with that. However = if you, Randy or any other Lancair drivers right up to Joe instead = advocate the disregard of the current published limitations, I = personally think that's an unwise choice. I've been a professional = pilot since I left college and I wasn't trained to think that way and = strongly discourage the practice. Why don't we just leave it at that. Regards, Skip ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01CA76B4.6AED2E00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =EF=BB=BF
I guess I'm in with you Randy and=20 Lynn.
After I bought my 360 - 14 years ago - = I felt=20 somewhat obligated and even responsible to make sure it had sufficient = margins=20 of safety for any circumstances before I flew with any passengers.  = After=20 all, I had not even been the one to build it.  I had three = greybeard=20 mechanics look it over very thoroughly also.
  A little at a time and with = inspections=20 after each flight, I increased speed to 300 mph indicated and pulled up = to 7.5=20 g's.  I also stalled it and made sure it would not enter some = unrecoverable=20 spin.    After that, I have not worried about it much in the = course of=20 giving rides to literally hundreds of people.  Almost all of them = had the=20 controls during part of their flight.
There is really no way to know if an = experimental=20 homebuilt will hold together at speeds or loads even much less than the = lancair=20 factory recommendations.  Whoever flies an experimental plane is a = test=20 pilot to some extent.
 
I know a number of Lancairs have = modified engines -=20 such as higher compression pistons and electronic ignitions among other=20 things.
These are not approved by Lycoming and=20 Continental.  Should they be considered too dangerous = also?
 
May the LML police have a = ball.
 
Mark Ravinski
  360  1481 hrs  1110 of = it=20 mine.
X Air Force flight = instructor.
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Randy
To: LML
Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2009 = 12:32=20 PM
Subject: [LML] Re: Vne is NOT a = meaningless number

Skip,=20
I don't think = Lynn nor I=20 have advocated in any way that any pilot fly in any manor. I merely = stated=20 that I, on occasion, push my Lancair past Vne and Lynn had = stated that=20 he pushes his Lancair past Vne. Neither one of us has = recommended=20 anyone else to do this.
Since my = admission I have=20 been insulted, berated, talked down to and pretty much left for dead. = Lynn=20 chimes in and he's treated in the same manor. =
I personally = feel safe in my=20 judgment, I've been flying a long time and well versed with this model = Lancair. Lynn, as well, is very experienced with his Lancair and his=20 judgments.
Why all the=20 hate??  These are our choices, we feel safe, how did this = become=20 everyone else's condemnation?
Neither Lynn nor = I have=20 asked anyone here to fly with us, we haven't offered to train anyone = to exceed=20 Vne, we haven't promoted doing = anything......
This is a forum = about=20 Lancair's, geared to a Lancair community. We are not all gray, we are = all=20 individuals, we all make our own choices. Not to judged.=20
In all the years = I've been=20 on this forum I have never seen so much disrespect towards fellow = Lancair=20 builders / pilots. All from sharing information. =
We were just = discussing=20 Lancair's in a Lancair forum.
I hope I speak = for Lynn, and=20 others that have defended our free choice, to enjoy our Lancair's = as=20 we see fit. 
I know everyone = here on the=20 LML wishes everyone safe flying.
 
Randy=20 Stuart
LNC-2
 
I need to go=20 fly!!!
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Skip=20 Slater
Sent: Friday, December 04, = 2009 11:01=20 PM
Subject: [LML] Re: Vne is NOT = a=20 meaningless number

Lynn,
   My only = objection=20 here is the cavalier disregard for limitations.  Your = plane is an=20 exception in that it was specifically modified to race, as was = Greenameyer's=20 and the IV that Lancair raced in the early Sport Class races in = Reno=20 (at least the engine was).  Your mods make your plane safe to = fly at=20 those speeds and you have established a higher Vne that you=20 respect.  That's the smart way to do it.  The vast = majority=20 of the Lancairs flying don't have the airframe mods you have = and their=20 pilots, if they choose to fly past redline IAS, have nothing = upon which=20 to base their own limiting airspeed.  I hope you're not = suggesting that=20 they're all as safe to fly as fast as you do.
   If our entire = community decides=20 that limitations are just guidelines which can be ignored, we = deserve all=20 the bad press we've been getting.  If you ignore Vne, why not = ignore an=20 RMP limit, G limit or any other limitation you find too = restrictive? =20 It's an attitude we shouldn't be fostering, particularly in = a=20 public forum such as the LML.
  If Joe B. thinks Lancair = Vne's are too=20 low, why doesn't he raise them?  If the factory endorses the = raising of=20 limits based upon their own research and flight testing, I have no = problem=20 with that.  However if you, = Randy or any=20 other Lancair drivers right up to Joe instead advocate the = disregard of=20 the current published limitations, I personally think that's an = unwise=20 choice.  I've been a professional pilot since I left = college=20 and I wasn't trained to think that way and strongly = discourage the=20 practice.
   Why don't we just = leave it at=20 that.
   Regards,
  =20 Skip 
------=_NextPart_000_000D_01CA76B4.6AED2E00--