X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 17:11:37 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from bar01.comporium.net ([208.104.2.35] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.9e) with ESMTP id 6859888 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 05 May 2014 15:46:58 -0400 Received-SPF: neutral receiver=logan.com; client-ip=208.104.2.35; envelope-from=snopercod@comporium.net X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1399319183-07cf4e3279c9660001-yPXFKn Received: from rg25.comporium.net (rg24.comporium.net [208.104.2.16]) by barracuda. with ESMTP id GiPuFhINxBWxQgYA for ; Mon, 05 May 2014 15:46:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: snopercod@comporium.net X-Barracuda-Apparent-Source-IP: 208.104.2.16 Received: from 33.225.235.68.dsl.brvdnc.dynamic.citcom.Net (EHLO _127.0.0.1_) ([68.235.225.33]) by rg24.comporium.net (MOS 4.3.4-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id RIV11422 (AUTH snopercod); Mon, 05 May 2014 15:46:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-Message-ID: <5367EA8C.3090205@comporium.net> X-Original-Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 15:46:20 -0400 From: John Cooper User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Subject: Re: [LML] [LNC2] Fast taxi testing Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040404060306030906080305" X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [LML] [LNC2] Fast taxi testing X-Barracuda-Connect: rg24.comporium.net[208.104.2.16] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1399319183 X-Barracuda-URL: http://208.104.2.35:8000/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at comporium.net X-Barracuda-BRTS-Status: 1 X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=3.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.3.5561 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.00 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040404060306030906080305 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit George-- Thanks for the speedy reply. To answer your questions: *Tire pressure* was 42 in the nose, and 60 in both of the mains. Curiously, Lancair doesn't have a recommended tire pressure for the Cheng Shen tires with tubes (that I can find). I believe the consensus around here is 50 in the nose and 70 in the mains so I was a little low. I'd sure like to know the proper values... FWIW, I had 50/70/70 of nitrogen in the tires last November so in 7 months they all lost about 8-10 PSI. *Nose strut pressure* was sufficient to achieve a 1" squat" from full extension - somewhere around 180 PSIG (The log book is at the hangar). The strut was factory rebuilt nine years ago and has been pretty much sitting ever since. Perhaps I should rebuild it just on general principles. *The CG* for the first run with 9 gal. in the header tank and wing tanks empty was near the forward limit. The CG for the second run with 10 gal. in the wings was 1" aft of the forward limit. *Takeoff technique:* I was holding the stick aft since my original goal was to find out at what IAS I could lift the nose. I never got fast enough. I was focused on staying out of the weeds but I believe I reached 50-60 KTs indicated. I just spoke with "Larry" at Lancair and he said it sounds like my mains could be out of alignment or a brake could be dragging. I'll be checking both those items tomorrow. If I was reading Larry correctly, I don't think he believed the problem was the oleo strut. --------------040404060306030906080305 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit George--

Thanks for the speedy reply. To answer your questions:

Tire pressure was 42 in the nose, and 60 in both of the mains. Curiously, Lancair doesn't have a recommended tire pressure for the Cheng Shen tires with tubes (that I can find). I believe the consensus around here is 50 in the nose and 70 in the mains so I was a little low. I'd sure like to know the proper values... FWIW, I had 50/70/70 of nitrogen in the tires last November so in 7 months they all lost about 8-10 PSI.

Nose strut pressure was sufficient to achieve a 1" squat" from full extension - somewhere around 180 PSIG (The log book is at the hangar). The strut was factory rebuilt nine years ago and has been pretty much sitting ever since. Perhaps I should rebuild it just on general principles.

The CG for the first run with 9 gal. in the header tank and wing tanks empty was near the forward limit. The CG for the second run with 10 gal. in the wings was 1" aft of the forward limit.

Takeoff technique: I was holding the stick aft since my original goal was to find out at what IAS I could lift the nose. I never got fast enough. I was focused on staying out of the weeds but I believe I reached 50-60 KTs indicated.

I just spoke with "Larry" at Lancair and he said it sounds like my mains could be out of alignment or a brake could be dragging. I'll be checking both those items tomorrow. If I was reading Larry correctly, I don't think he believed the problem was the oleo strut.


--------------040404060306030906080305--