X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 15:14:55 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imr-da04.mx.aol.com ([205.188.105.146] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.8) with ESMTP id 4397477 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 18 Jul 2010 14:49:05 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.105.146; envelope-from=Sky2high@aol.com Received: from imo-ma02.mx.aol.com (imo-ma02.mx.aol.com [64.12.78.137]) by imr-da04.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o6IImPw3032583 for ; Sun, 18 Jul 2010 14:48:25 -0400 Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-ma02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.9.) id q.deb.e2f733c (43816) for ; Sun, 18 Jul 2010 14:48:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from magic-d17.mail.aol.com (magic-d17.mail.aol.com [172.19.155.133]) by cia-dc01.mx.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILCIADC015-ab284c434c7656; Sun, 18 Jul 2010 14:48:22 -0400 From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 14:48:22 EDT Subject: Re: [LML] 320/360 CG and Pitch Sensitivity X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_a4ba4.750bda09.3974a676_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 9.5 sub 155 X-AOL-ORIG-IP: 67.175.87.113 X-AOL-IP: 172.19.155.133 X-Spam-Flag:NO X-AOL-SENDER: Sky2high@aol.com --part1_a4ba4.750bda09.3974a676_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Rob, Not hung up on MAC%, it is what Lancair reported in its POH. It is used in many flight planning programs W&B section. I just like things to make sense. The FAA has a hang up on loading the airplane inside the CG range as specified in a part of the airworthiness documentation. The Phase I requirements are that you test and log flight characteristics at certain CG points. Besides, I keep trying to push the point that in our reflex wing aircraft in the real world of flight, there are two control surfaces that address aircraft pitch management: the elevator and the flap throughout its range. Use all the controls that ya got when ya need'm..... But, I'm too much of an Emu (Aussie chicken) to be fooling around the edges of the CG envelope. Maybe somebody else could report test results. Scott In a message dated 7/18/2010 12:47:57 P.M. Central Daylight Time, rwolf99@aol.com writes: Some of us on the list are getting hung up on the CG range as a percent of mean aerodynamic chord. To an aircraft designer, expessing the CG range this way is used for preliminary design purposes only --we want to make sure that we have a usable product that can support real world loading conditions, and also to know where the landing gear needs to be. (It's bad when the airplane falls on its tail when the pilot throws a suitcase in the back...) --part1_a4ba4.750bda09.3974a676_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Rob,

Not hung up on MAC%, it is what Lancair reported in its POH. It= is=20 used in many flight planning programs W&B section. I just like= things=20 to make sense.

The FAA has a hang up on loading the airplane inside the CG range as= =20 specified in a part of the airworthiness documentation. The Phase I= =20 requirements are that you test and log flight characteristics at cert= ain CG=20 points.

Besides, I keep trying to push the point that in our reflex wing= =20 aircraft in the real world of flight, there are two control surfaces= that=20 address aircraft pitch management: the elevator and the flap througho= ut its=20 range. Use all the controls that ya got when ya need'm..... But, I'm= too=20 much of an Emu (Aussie chicken) to be fooling around the edges of the CG= =20 envelope. Maybe somebody else could report test results.

Scott

In a message dated 7/18/2010 12:47:57 P.M. Central Daylight Time,=20 rwolf99@aol.com writes:

Some of us on the list are getting hung up on the CG range as a per= cent=20 of mean aerodynamic chord. To an aircraft designer, expessing the= CG=20 range this way is used for preliminary design purposes only --we want to= make=20 sure that we have a usable product that can support real world loading= =20 conditions, and also to know where the landing gear needs to be. = (It's=20 bad when the airplane falls on its tail when the pilot throws a suitcase= in=20 the back...)

--part1_a4ba4.750bda09.3974a676_boundary--