Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=98.139.52.228; envelope-from=bryanwinberry@bellsouth.net
From: "Bryan Winberry" <bryanwinberry@bellsouth.net>
To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-4571599@logan.com>
Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Bear hawk dream airplane
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 19:23:16 -0500
Message-ID: <8973B94FE00944F6B1E487552A5E2522@acer7fbfa7e2f7>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Index: Act/orPoCuziOQHlQ+aBqKi222QgowAAGigg
In-Reply-To: <list-4571599@logan.com>

Charlie,
I would agree with you regarding rudder use with one exception.  The F-4 was
one fighter that required extensive rudder use.  Using aileron at high AOA
would tend to cause the aircraft to depart controlled flight.  The newer
fighters, not so much.

That being said, it still comes down to basic stick and rudder skills.
Whether you have 100 or 100.000 hours, you have to get good instruction
and stay proficient.  That's true for a 152 or a SR-71.

Bryan
BTW, I slip my "heavy" sometimes if ATC slam dunks me.

-----Original Message-----
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On
Behalf Of Charlie England
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 7:13 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Bear hawk dream airplane

On 11/8/2010 3:08 PM, Don Walker wrote:
> On 11/8/2010 10:43 AM, Don Walker wrote:
>> Dustin,
>> My hanger landlord, a 20,000 hour ATP finished building a Bearhawk 
>> with an 0-540 in it.  He's a serial builder and it's a 10.5 out of 
>> 10.  According to him, the design has several serious flaws.  He put 
>> it on it's back in a moderate crosswind.  Cost him 30 grand.  After 
>> checking out the problem he found:  The landing gear from the factory 
>> are not straight.  He modified and straightened them.  It needs Much 
>> more engine offset.  The tail is much too small.  Factory support 
>> leaves much to be desired and design deficiency problems are left to 
>> be worked out by the builders.  The company may be in financial 
>> trouble.  I have flown it in once with him since all the rework.  
>> Nice solid airplane and not as heavy on the controls as many.  I 
>> watched his landing on a no wind day and he worked very hard with a 
>> lot of fast stick and rudder work.  He still won't fly it with 
>> moderate cross winds.  There is a Bearhawk builders group on Yahoo.  
>> Suggest you spend a lot of time reading over the postings.  Just a 
>> heads up.
>>
>> Don Walker
>> RV-8 Renesis
>> Flying and modifying
> Charles England
> F-4, MD-80, Built 2 RV-8s too!   I'm always happy to stir things up.  
> Flame on!
> Don Walker
The F-4 & MD-80 time doesn't mean diddly when you start flying a 
tailwheel a/c (which is what I was talking about in my 1st post). I've 
never had the chance to fly a Bearhawk but I have had fighter pilots try 
to fly my -4. The ones that know how to use their feet didn't learn it 
in the military or at the airlines.

No flaming intended; I just want to know a critic's credentials. :-)

Charlie

--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:
http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html