|
|
I've got the larger, carbon fiber tail on my 320. In spite of your opinion, it doesn't seem much like any Cessna I've flown. My guess is that it flies a lot like the small tail version, except it has better elevator response over a broader speed range. Being carbon fiber, it may not have added any weight, but I don't really know.
My notion is that Lancair didn't "...mess up a good thing", but fixed a bad thing. I've been very happy with the flying qualities of N42BK except for its rather dramatic power off stall characteristics (which I cannot imagine being any better with the small tail).
Bill Kennedy
N42BK, 599.6
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 07:28:51 -0400
From: anpfield@sbcglobal.net
Subject: [LML] Re: 320/360 MK II tail
Well said, Bill Rumburg!!! Don’t
mess up a good thing.
Pete Field
320, Small Tail
N775DX, St. Louis
From: William Rumburg
[mailto:lancair403@verizon.net]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 5:45
PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] 320/360 MK II tail
Many have cut off (and continue to cut off) the original 320
'small' elevator/horizontal stabilizer. The 320/360 is a sport plane and it's a
shame to cut off or abandon the origional elevator/horizontal stabilizer
and replace it with the heavy MK II elevator/horizontal stabilizer,
turning it into a 'Cessna', as dictated by the Austalian CAA ...a SHAME!
I built and have flown a 320 with the original
elevator/horizontal stabilizer for twelve years. It's a sport plane and
NOT a Cessna!
The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Get started.
|
|