Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 20:58:55 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-d09.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.41] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.5) with ESMTP id 1983422 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 20:27:02 -0500 Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-d09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id q.7e.33ff0536 (3972) for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 20:26:52 -0500 (EST) From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <7e.33ff0536.2b5612dc@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 20:26:52 EST Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Wing Loading mysteries X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_7e.33ff0536.2b5612dc_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 4104 --part1_7e.33ff0536.2b5612dc_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/14/2003 3:44:17 PM Central Standard Time, harrelson@erols.com writes: > Hey Scott, remember way back in day one of private pilot ground school, they > gave us the principle of lift=weight in unaccellerated flight? It's even a > question on the private written. > > The funny thing is, it ain't so...never has been. As you so correctly > calculated, we're flying around with lift being 30-60 lbs more than weight > in our 320's. I'm quite sure that if the Feds ever found out about this, > they'd file violations against us! How dare you fly around in such a > condition, you...you...scofflaw. > Bill, Just one cotton-picking minute. If the front seat people just lose 25 pounds apiece, (2 x 240) then the aiplane is well within the "law". FARs were written to be bent. I measured my jack points at 32" and with header full, 10 gal in each wing, the no-pilot CG is 22" at 1400 pounds total weight. 1400 x (32-22) = 14000 / (165-32) = 105 pounds on the tail to balance the plane whilst on jacks. Of course, I add another 50 pounds just to make sure the nose wheel stays off during gear tests. Later, Scott Krueger N92EX --part1_7e.33ff0536.2b5612dc_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/14/2003 3:44:17 PM Central Standard Time, harrelson@erols.com writes:

Hey Scott, remember way back in day one of private pilot ground school, they gave us the principle of lift=weight in unaccellerated flight? It's even a question on the private written.

The funny thing is, it ain't so...never has been. As you so correctly calculated, we're flying around with lift being 30-60 lbs more than weight in our 320's. I'm quite sure that if the Feds ever found out about this, they'd file violations against us!  How dare you fly around in such a condition, you...you...scofflaw.


Bill,

Just one cotton-picking minute.  If the front seat people just lose 25 pounds apiece, (2 x 240) then the aiplane is well within the "law".  FARs were written to be bent.

I measured my jack points at 32" and with header full, 10 gal in each wing, the no-pilot CG   is 22" at 1400 pounds total weight.  1400 x (32-22) = 14000 / (165-32) = 105 pounds on the tail to balance the plane whilst on jacks.  Of course, I add another 50 pounds just to make sure the nose wheel stays off during gear tests.

Later,

Scott Krueger
N92EX --part1_7e.33ff0536.2b5612dc_boundary--