X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:13:21 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from carbinge.com ([69.5.27.218] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with SMTP id 5991401 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:02:37 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=69.5.27.218; envelope-from=jbarrett@carbinge.com Received: (qmail 734 invoked from network); 2 Jan 2013 15:02:03 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; h=X-Originating-IP:Reply-To:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language; s=default; d=carbinge.com; b=U3F4qf5Fq0slZ6sujCKt4ThgcvRmnlEWJDMOsNKLbYdPyAGOxv7ofFFpdFUp/OUcaO7rqKrd11Q+9axuwsaMnZMIvChI980YAbF4GQVaRfC6XU0fizjji0HvTsvt4KksF3ZB1iXP33qDewPRs8s1pOX3LZ0eBkaaODJPd7PJ/M4=; X-Originating-IP: [66.235.58.245] Reply-To: From: "John Barrett" X-Original-To: "'Lancair Mailing List'" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [LML] Re: 3 killed in small plane crash in Southern California X-Original-Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 07:01:56 -0800 X-Original-Message-ID: <026601cde8fa$1c3dc290$54b947b0$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0267_01CDE8B7.0E1A8290" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ac3o9+Mznc8BQhPXTTSd5fzY3sO8JQAAbRSQ Content-Language: en-us This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0267_01CDE8B7.0E1A8290 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks Jeff, =20 I bow to your experience in this and appreciate the correction. My = logic was that the tail boom is fragile and doesn=E2=80=99t take that = much to break off. Haven=E2=80=99t seen all that many pictures of stall = spins with Lancairs but expected the aircraft to be broken up a lot = more. I guess it=E2=80=99s a testament to the amazing strength of these = carbon fiber structures. =20 John =20 From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = vtailjeff@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 6:46 AM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Re: 3 killed in small plane crash in Southern California =20 John, =20 That's what a spin impact looks like. If you could see the tail that is = broken off you could get an idea of direction of the spin. =20 Jeff Sent from my iPad On Jan 2, 2013, at 7:11 AM, "John Barrett" = wrote: Interesting crash site photos that don=E2=80=99t seem to correlate with = reports of A/C in spin, stall or aerobatic attitudes. Looks like he = pancaked in with a reasonable flat trajectory and photos don=E2=80=99t = show evidence of significant pieces missing. Could he have gotten in a = spin or stall and just been pulling out when he impacted ground? =20 I know we shouldn=E2=80=99t speculate, but photos and eyewitness reports = seem to have a disconnect. =20 John Barrett =20 From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = Guy and Jill Foreman Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 6:43 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Re: 3 killed in small plane crash in Southern California =20 IV-PT That crashed was N5M. =20 Guy Foreman ------=_NextPart_000_0267_01CDE8B7.0E1A8290 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks Jeff,

 

I bow to your experience in this and appreciate the correction.=C2=A0 = My logic was that the tail boom is fragile and doesn=E2=80=99t take that = much to break off.=C2=A0 Haven=E2=80=99t seen all that many pictures of = stall spins with Lancairs but expected the aircraft to be broken up a = lot more.=C2=A0 I guess it=E2=80=99s a testament to the amazing strength = of these carbon fiber structures.

 

John

 

From:= = Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = vtailjeff@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 6:46 = AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: 3 = killed in small plane crash in Southern = California

 

John,

 

That's what a spin impact looks like. If you could see = the tail that is broken off you could get an idea of direction of the = spin.

 

Jeff

Sent from my = iPad


On Jan 2, 2013, at 7:11 AM, = "John Barrett" <jbarrett@carbinge.com> = wrote:

Interesting crash site photos that don=E2=80=99t seem to correlate = with reports of A/C in spin, stall or aerobatic attitudes.  Looks = like he pancaked in with a reasonable flat trajectory and photos = don=E2=80=99t show evidence of significant pieces missing.  Could = he have gotten in a spin or stall and just been pulling out when he = impacted ground?

 

I know we shouldn=E2=80=99t speculate, but photos and eyewitness = reports seem to have a disconnect.

 

John Barrett

 

From:= = Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] = On Behalf Of Guy and Jill Foreman
Sent: Tuesday, = January 01, 2013 6:43 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Sub= ject: [LML] Re: 3 killed in small plane crash in Southern = California

 

IV-PT That = crashed was N5M.
 
Guy = Foreman

------=_NextPart_000_0267_01CDE8B7.0E1A8290--