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...)