X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 22:47:13 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mta11.charter.net ([216.33.127.80] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.2) with ESMTP id 4132255 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 20 Feb 2010 19:39:38 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.33.127.80; envelope-from=lhenney@charter.net Received: from imp11 ([10.20.200.11]) by mta11.charter.net (InterMail vM.7.09.02.04 201-2219-117-106-20090629) with ESMTP id <20100221003904.VMEQ8038.mta11.charter.net@imp11> for ; Sat, 20 Feb 2010 19:39:04 -0500 Received: from CYBERMAX ([96.39.213.138]) by imp11 with smtp.charter.net id kQf31d0052zjSxc05Qf352; Sat, 20 Feb 2010 19:39:04 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=3oc9M9_CAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=hOpmn2quAAAA:8 a=Weh2U8_DL44jBX9RNAMA:9 a=gbhZ1_lxVV8MxpPJMPIA:7 a=G1epxFw8k3xmFLo8qOrHYtGzcBIA:4 a=6e4CQMaF2vYA:10 a=U8Ie8EnqySEA:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=hUswqBWy9Q8A:10 a=CMiTeMOKAe1o2m0vtZkA:9 a=qStMYxHWw6jfl3PLrHQA:7 a=D2jQLCUfUpbgMbt3u1v8x3vaasAA:4 From: "Larry Henney" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" Subject: [LML] N41LA 1st Flight 2nd Report X-Original-Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 18:39:02 -0600 X-Original-Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00D9_01CAB25B.F99F3890" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 thread-index: AcqyHN4x8q2A4FK6QmG4FYQlYe4p/QAcKwDw X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00D9_01CAB25B.F99F3890 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit But alas Mark and I both concur that about 3 degrees vs.. 7 is indeed faster. Anyway, yes they are reflexed and surely they are supposed to be back in 1987, no? Convince me. Hmmmm, Are you saying that at rest they are another 3 degrees above the fillet? At high speed cruise, say 180 KIAS or so, with the extra reflex, what is the position of the elevator horns? Is it difficult to trim nose down? What is the horizontal stab angle of incidence? No. We found fastest speed to occur at only 3 degrees above the faired position as opposed to the full 7. I found flap position had little affect on the 1/4" high elevator horn on my Mark II tail. I haven't had the nerve to peak on Rick's small tail NA 320 yet. Rick's 320 trim's with the slide bar. I did adjust the null point on flights 3 & 4. I need to increase the high end slot about another 1/4" and the low end is good down to about 80 mph which seems satisfactory. More data to come. Very fun first 7.5 hours. Larry _____ From: Sky2high@aol.com [mailto:Sky2high@aol.com] Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 5:59 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [LML] FW: [LML] N41LA 1st Flight 2nd Report Larry, See interspersed remarks below. Looking forward to more adjustment info. Grayhawk In a message dated 2/19/2010 12:18:13 P.M. Central Standard Time, LHenney@charter.net writes: Grayhawk, Always the deep thinker. You are correct to note the roll error. However, after working with several 320/ 360 series roll errors I contend to have a better fix. The flap lowering drag thing is too inefficient, ugly, and fails to address the root problem (imho). I believe wings are to make lift. By contrast, flap lift in cruise flight adds only to unwanted twisting moments.... The flap is part of the wing as designed until it goes lower than being taken out of reflex - then it is a flap. There was one thing (only one?) I did not check carefully whilst building - the lateral relationship betwixt the outboard trailing edge (corner) of each fuselage fairing to flap since I was depending on the moldings. If I remember correctly (and post build), the left one was 1/2" higher than the right when the aircraft was leveled laterally. Since the flap and aileron were built so that their trailing edge was on a straight line from that fairing to the wingtip TE when the wing was positioned on its jig, it is possible that left wing heavy occurred because the faired flap is too high on the left wing (or a little twist is built in). Thus, frequently the level flight position is achieved by adjusting the flaps (left down a bit, right up a bit) and cosmetically fixing the mismatch at the fuselage with bondo (uh, micro). However, note that if one is flying solo (assuming internal components have been placed so that the empty weight is almost evenly split between the mains), the left wing needs slightly more lift. For a reasonably weighted pilot and almost full wing tanks (standard design), 4 gallons more in the right wing than the left pretty much balances the aircraft around the centerline. Of course, equal wing fuel and a similarly weighted right seat occupant accomplishes the same. It is up to the builder on whether to bias the wing lift for solo or dual flight - anyway, that is easily handled by aileron trim. The flap adjustment is so minor as to not affect overall flight characteristics other than remove the "heavy" wing component. Think of it as less reflexed unlift. We removed the trailing spar attach strap. Then we offset the two outboard holes on a new strap by 90 thousandths. After flying flight two today, the ailerons sit perfectly flat with no roll component. There was no adjustment to the flaps. They look good on the ramp (especially when you look at them simultaneously!). Clever! Now the real ponderance. Should I make both left and right new trailing edge straps with 45 thousandths correction on each side? This of course would minimize that finger nail thickness of body work error..... Regarding flap reflex...... This is a vintage 1987 glacially slow build 320. I remember a long time ago that you almost convinced me that my FB 360 circa 1996 had the fillets set to the 7 deg reflex. "almost" because my manual still said to set them 5/8" high (or so). I thought you were working the FB aspect. Are you saying ALL 320/ 360 vintage fillets are molded correct to 7 deg reflex? So only the 235s were to be reflexed? Could Lancair maybe mention this manual / blue print error in a SB? It is 7 degrees. The 235 fillets matched the unreflexed wing design and the recommendation was to raise the flaps to -7 degrees when over certain speeds (140 or 160 KIAS, I forget) because of the severe wing twist if left in the 235 "faired" position. I am sure you feel the terrific pitching moment when the flaps are moved. The 320 slow build fillets were molded to the cruise position. My instructions did not contain anything about adjusting them above the faired in position. I know you tested performance by trying to reduce drag from lift at high speed by raising the flaps higher than normal and you reported that no improvement resulted (of course this was information passed to other competing racers and may have been, uh, adjusted for their consumption). I tried the same and also found no improvement and I am still willing to take on any NA 320 side-by-side regardless of their flap position. It is true that if the flaps are adjusted to the fillet at 0 KIAS, they will fly higher at >0 KIAS - easily checked by hand lifting them and noting that they will be above the fillet. Maybe the instructions you saw were to correct for badly molded fillets. But alas Mark and I both concur that about 3 degrees vs. 7 is indeed faster. Anyway, yes they are reflexed and surely they are supposed to be back in 1987, no? Convince me. Hmmmm, Are you saying that at rest they are another 3 degrees above the fillet? At high speed cruise, say 180 KIAS or so, with the extra reflex, what is the position of the elevator horns? Is it difficult to trim nose down? What is the horizontal stab angle of incidence? BTW, the VEP up pressure switch lasted 2.2 hours. Not bad from what I hear. Lucky to have a spare new style switch in my parts bin. More data collection tomorrow. Larry _____ From: Sky2high@aol.com [mailto:Sky2high@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 6:50 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [LML] N41LA 1st Flight Rick, Congrats! Uh, the 320 slow build kit contained at least 121,432 parts, not to mention all the extra hardware obtained from Ace and various race shops. It also consumed 19,123 sheets of sandpaper. Comments: The flaps are flying too high in pic # 1 and 2. In all pix, the left aileron is below the wing tip fairing usually indicating a heavy left wing (very common). Re-rigging the flaps can help with the heavy wing condition. Grayhawk In a message dated 2/17/2010 1:39:41 P.M. Central Standard Time, LHenney@charter.net writes: Lancair Friends, Put your hands together for Rick Cathriner's most excellent 1st Flight. N41LA Certification occurred earlier today with a very complimentary "no squawks" report from his DAR Dave Eby. N41LA took to the sky's today after a 22 year gestation. Lady's and Gentleman I suspect we have a record. Airborne initial testing shows again, no gripes, fast and true. Builds Slow, Flies Fast! Does anyone remember how many pieces came in the original 320 slow build kit?!!! Still wishing someone would step up with a Riechal Trim system. Anyone, anyone? Bueller? I think we'll reverse engineer one from a local 320 flyer...... Congratulations Rick on a Job Well Done! To you builders out there, never give up! To the flyers, meet Rick for lunch sometime. He's earned at least one free trip to the Hard Eights BBQ in Stephenville (SEP). Way to Go Rick! Larry Henney -- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_00D9_01CAB25B.F99F3890 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
But alas = Mark and I=20 both concur that about 3 degrees vs.. 7 is indeed faster.  = Anyway, yes=20 they are reflexed and surely they are supposed to be back in 1987, = no? =20 Convince me.
Hmmmm, Are you saying that at rest they are another 3 degrees above = the=20 fillet?  At high speed cruise, say 180 KIAS or so, with the extra = reflex,=20 what is the position of the elevator horns?  Is it = difficult to=20 trim nose down? What is the horizontal stab angle of = incidence?
 
No.  We = found fastest=20 speed to occur at only 3 degrees above the faired position as opposed to = the=20 full 7.
 
I found flap position = had little=20 affect on the 1/4" high elevator horn on my Mark II tail.  I = haven't had=20 the nerve to peak on Rick's small tail NA 320 yet.
 
Rick's 320 trim's = with the slide=20 bar.  I did adjust the null point on flights 3 & 4.  I = need to=20 increase the high end slot about another 1/4" and the low end is good = down to=20 about 80 mph which seems satisfactory.
 
More data to = come.  Very fun=20 first 7.5 hours.
 
 
Larry

From: Sky2high@aol.com = [mailto:Sky2high@aol.com]=20
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 5:59 PM
To:=20 lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: Re: [LML] FW: [LML] N41LA 1st = Flight=20 2nd Report

Larry,
 
See interspersed remarks below.  Looking forward to more = adjustment=20 info.
 
Grayhawk
 
In a message dated 2/19/2010 12:18:13 P.M. Central Standard Time,=20 LHenney@charter.net writes:
Grayhawk,
 
Always = the deep=20 thinker. You are correct to note the roll error.  However, after = working=20 with several 320/ 360 series roll errors I contend to have a better = fix. =20 The flap lowering drag thing is too inefficient, ugly,  and fails = to=20 address the root problem (imho). I believe wings are to make lift. By=20 contrast, flap lift in cruise flight adds only to unwanted = twisting=20 moments....
The flap is part of the wing as designed until it goes lower = than=20 being taken out of reflex - then it is a flap.  There was one thing = (only=20 one?) I did not check carefully whilst building - the lateral = relationship=20 betwixt the outboard trailing edge (corner) of each fuselage = fairing=20 to flap since I was depending on the moldings.  If I remember = correctly=20 (and post build), the left one was 1/2" higher than the right = when the=20 aircraft was leveled laterally. Since the flap and = aileron were built=20 so that their trailing edge was on a straight line from that fairing to = the=20 wingtip TE when the wing was positioned on its jig, it is possible that = left=20 wing heavy occurred because the faired flap is too high on the left = wing=20 (or a little twist is built in).  Thus, frequently the level = flight=20 position is achieved by adjusting the flaps (left down a bit, right = up a=20 bit) and cosmetically fixing the mismatch at the=20 fuselage with bondo (uh, micro).  However, note that if = one is=20 flying solo (assuming internal components have been placed so that the = empty=20 weight is almost evenly split between the mains), the left wing needs = slightly=20 more lift.  For a reasonably weighted pilot and almost full wing = tanks=20 (standard design), 4 gallons more in the right wing than the=20 left pretty much balances the aircraft around the centerline.  = Of=20 course, equal wing fuel and a similarly weighted right seat=20 occupant accomplishes the same.  It is up to the builder on = whether to=20 bias the wing lift for solo or dual flight - anyway, that is easily = handled by=20 aileron trim.  The flap adjustment is so minor as to not affect = overall=20 flight characteristics other than remove the "heavy" wing = component.  Think=20 of it as less reflexed unlift.
 
We = removed the trailing=20 spar attach strap.  Then we offset the two outboard holes on a = new strap=20 by 90 thousandths.  After flying flight two today, the ailerons = sit=20 perfectly flat with no roll component.  There was no adjustment = to the=20 flaps. They look good on the ramp (especially when you look at them=20 simultaneously!).
Clever!
 
 
Now the = real=20 ponderance.  Should I make both left and right new trailing edge = straps=20 with 45 thousandths correction on each side?  This of course=20 would minimize that finger nail thickness of body work=20 error.....
 
Regarding = flap=20 reflex......  This is a vintage 1987 glacially slow build = 320.  I=20 remember a long time ago that you almost convinced me that my FB 360 = circa=20 1996 had the fillets set to the 7 deg reflex.  "almost" = because=20 my manual still said to set them 5/8" high (or so).  I thought = you were=20 working the FB aspect.  Are you saying  ALL  320/ 360 vintage = fillets are=20 molded correct to 7 deg reflex?  So only the 235s were to be=20 reflexed?  Could Lancair maybe mention this manual / blue print = error in=20 a SB? 
It is 7 degrees.  The 235 fillets matched the unreflexed wing=20 design and the recommendation was to raise the flaps to -7 degrees = when=20 over certain speeds (140 or 160 KIAS, I forget) because of the severe = wing twist=20 if left in the 235 "faired" position.  I am sure you feel the = terrific=20 pitching moment when the flaps are moved.  The 320 slow build = fillets were=20 molded to the cruise position.  My instructions did not contain = anything=20 about adjusting them above the faired in position.  I know you = tested=20 performance by trying to reduce drag from lift at high speed by raising = the=20 flaps higher than normal and you reported that no improvement resulted = (of=20 course this was information passed to other competing racers and may = have been,=20 uh, adjusted for their consumption).  I tried the same and also = found no=20 improvement and I am still willing to take on any NA 320 side-by-side = regardless=20 of their flap position. It is true that if the flaps are adjusted to the = fillet=20 at 0 KIAS, they will fly higher at >0 KIAS - easily checked by=20 hand lifting them and noting that they will be above the = fillet. =20 Maybe the instructions you saw were to correct for badly molded=20 fillets. 
 
 
But alas = Mark and I=20 both concur that about 3 degrees vs. 7 is indeed faster.  Anyway, = yes=20 they are reflexed and surely they are supposed to be back in 1987, = no? =20 Convince me.
Hmmmm, Are you saying that at rest they are another 3 degrees above = the=20 fillet?  At high speed cruise, say 180 KIAS or so, with the extra = reflex,=20 what is the position of the elevator horns?  Is it = difficult to=20 trim nose down? What is the horizontal stab angle of = incidence?
 
 
BTW, the = VEP  up  pressure switch = lasted 2.2=20 hours.  Not bad from what I hear. Lucky to have a spare new style = switch=20 in my parts bin.  More data collection tomorrow.
 
Larry

From: Sky2high@aol.com = [mailto:Sky2high@aol.com]=20
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 6:50 PM
To:=20 lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: Re: [LML] N41LA 1st=20 Flight

Rick,
 
Congrats!
 
Uh, the 320 slow build kit contained at least 121,432 parts, not = to=20 mention all the extra hardware obtained from Ace and various race = shops. =20 It also consumed 19,123 sheets of sandpaper.
 
Comments:
The flaps are flying too high in pic # 1 and 2.
In all pix, the left aileron is below the wing tip fairing = usually=20 indicating a heavy left wing (very common).  Re-rigging the flaps = can=20 help with the heavy wing condition.
 
Grayhawk
 
In a message dated 2/17/2010 1:39:41 P.M. Central Standard Time,=20 LHenney@charter.net writes:
Lancair=20 Friends,
 
Put your = hands together=20 for Rick Cathriner's most excellent 1st Flight. N41LA Certification = occurred=20 earlier today with a very complimentary "no squawks" report from his = DAR=20 Dave Eby.
 
N41LA took = to the sky's=20 today after a 22 year gestation.  Lady's and Gentleman I = suspect=20 we have a record.  Airborne initial testing shows again, no = gripes,=20 fast and true.  Builds Slow, Flies Fast! Does anyone remember = how many=20 pieces came in the original 320 slow build kit?!!! =
 
Still = wishing someone=20 would step up with a Riechal Trim system.  Anyone, anyone? = Bueller?  I think we'll reverse engineer one from a local = 320=20 flyer......
 
Congratulations Rick on=20 a Job Well Done!  To you builders out there, never give = up!  To=20 the flyers, meet Rick for lunch sometime.  He's earned at least = one=20 free trip to the Hard Eights BBQ in Stephenville=20 (SEP).
 
Way to Go=20 Rick!
 
Larry=20 Henney
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


--
For archives = and unsub=20 = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
------=_NextPart_000_00D9_01CAB25B.F99F3890--