X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 13:55:33 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [66.70.126.15] (HELO omta0112.mta.everyone.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.0) with ESMTP id 5055670 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 13:26:43 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.70.126.15; envelope-from=bknotts@buckeye-express.com Received: from sj1-dm103.mta.everyone.net (bigip-ext [172.16.0.1]) by omta0112.mta.everyone.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6039C5A8143 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 10:26:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Eon-Dm: sj1-dm103 Received: by sj1-dm103.mta.everyone.net (EON-AUTHRELAY2 - 48f07e90) id sj1-dm103.4e1e193a.10fa8c for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 10:26:07 -0700 X-Eon-Sig: AQK8DXBOJGyvSWwwOgIAAAAB,06e55dfdc2d836185581c2af21d04858 X-Original-Message-ID: <4E246CB1.5060408@buckeye-express.com> X-Original-Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 13:26:09 -0400 From: "F. Barry Knotts" Reply-To: bknotts884@earthlink.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Electric flaps References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 110718-0, 07/18/2011), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Thanks, Colyn. The panel on my to-be-completed IV-P project will utilize the Vertical Power Dual VP-200 power panel. It has included in it the components for the control and indication of the position of the flaps. It was originally designed for the Legacy, I think. The major advantage that the electric flaps have with the VP-200 is that the flaps can be positioned by a single momentary toggle tap to a predetermined position. Multiple positions can be set up in the VP-200 (10 degrees, 20 degrees, full, etc.) Ten degrees always seems so vague to me. (Is it nine degrees, or does that look more like thirteen degrees?) (Does it matter?) The other plus...remains to be seen...is the reliability of replacing a hydraulic system for an electrical system. This is something to be determined. Of all the systems in my flying IV-P, the hydraulic system has been one of the most reliable. (Certainly behaving better than the electrical/avionics systems.) I suppose weight is also a factor. Relatively small difference, I think. But I did remove a few lengths of hydraulic hard lines and a few bits from the control head. More important, I reduced the number of sites of potential hydraulic leaks, especially in the cabin. That leaves the hydraulic system one task. Raising and lowering the gear. I hope to have reduced the number of failure points in the hydraulic system by eliminating the hydraulic system from the flaps. I can still land gracefully without flaps. Barry Knotts On 7/18/2011 12:26 PM, Colyn Case wrote: > Nice post Barry. Although I can imagine the reasons I wonder what > YOUR reasons were for switching to electric. > > On Jul 17, 2011, at 10:11 AM, F. Barry Knotts wrote: > >> For Brian Campbell: >> >> I was unable to penetrate your spam filter directly, so here's some >> info on the installation of electric flaps in a IV-P. The photograph >> files