Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 21:36:44 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-r04.mx.aol.com ([152.163.225.100] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.5) with ESMTP id 1983477 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 21:19:17 -0500 Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-r04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id q.11.751fac6 (3972) for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 21:19:14 -0500 (EST) From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <11.751fac6.2b561f22@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 21:19:14 EST Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Wing Loading mysteries X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_11.751fac6.2b561f22_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 8.0 for Windows US sub 4104 --part1_11.751fac6.2b561f22_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/14/2003 7:58:34 PM Central Standard Time, marv@lancaironline.net writes: > Don't forget about the pitching moment about the MAC. Cm is fairly > small for our airfoil (-.05) and the reflex will reduce it further but > it still amounts to a significant down force requirement for the tail. > Chris, Yeah, I talked to Jack Webb today. There are many variables. But, let us not forget that the engine is pitched up a bit and there is some fuselage effect since my cowl and canopy want to be badly sucked upwards. All I know is that the faster I go, the more I must trim nose down, not nose up. I built a tube and fabric (Quad Cities Challenger II, sold long ago) with flaperons. I used a linear motor to operate the "flap" part of the flaperons. This became the pitch trim - no tab on the elevator. Luckily, the rear seat passenger, if any, sat on the middle of the CG range. If I think about it hard enough, trim via reflexing the flap may not be the best idea since the tail is being unloaded. Speed via drag reduction was not a consideration. Oh, my head is starting to hurt. Scott Krueger N92EX --part1_11.751fac6.2b561f22_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 1/14/2003 7:58:34 PM Central Standard Time, marv@lancaironline.net writes:

Don't forget about the pitching moment about the MAC.  Cm is fairly
small for our airfoil (-.05) and the reflex will reduce it further but
it still amounts to a significant down force requirement for the tail.


Chris,

Yeah, I talked to Jack Webb today.  There are many variables.  But, let us not forget that the engine is pitched up a bit and there is some fuselage effect since my cowl and canopy want to be badly sucked upwards.  All I know is that the faster I go, the more I must trim nose down, not nose up.

I built a tube and fabric (Quad Cities Challenger II, sold long ago) with flaperons. I used a linear motor to operate the "flap" part of the flaperons.  This became the pitch trim - no tab on the elevator.

Luckily, the rear seat passenger, if any, sat on the middle of the CG range.  If I think about it hard enough,  trim via reflexing the flap may not be the best idea since the tail is being unloaded.  Speed via drag reduction was not a consideration.  Oh, my head is starting to hurt.

Scott Krueger
N92EX

--part1_11.751fac6.2b561f22_boundary--