X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 12:16:42 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.7) with ESMTP id 6497833 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 01 Oct 2013 11:10:29 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=71.74.56.122; envelope-from=Wolfgang@MiCom.net X-Original-Return-Path: X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=IuicgcDg c=1 sm=0 a=MHZY6FYWMEQOp7S43i2QIw==:17 a=3Zlka_XeuxsA:10 a=VvjpDTABdFwA:10 a=ttCsPuSJ-FAA:10 a=rTjvlri0AAAA:8 a=KGjhK52YXX0A:10 a=BCimvE5KzQsA:10 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=5FIZSGrRAAAA:8 a=CAeqAKuRnXDTHVopc_sA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=CjxXgO3LAAAA:8 a=u4tYY5ol_xOmlOzFX9gA:9 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=tXsnliwV7b4A:10 a=rC2wZJ5BpNYA:10 a=hScG2cIJEOdRf9is:21 a=MHZY6FYWMEQOp7S43i2QIw==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Authenticated-User: X-Originating-IP: 74.218.201.50 Received: from [74.218.201.50] ([74.218.201.50:1677] helo=lobo) by hrndva-oedge04.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.3.46 r()) with ESMTP id 0F/7D-01415-3C5EA425; Tue, 01 Oct 2013 15:09:55 +0000 X-Original-Message-ID: <36EE82DC1F36424089A4707F6E024D7D@lobo> From: "Wolfgang" X-Original-To: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Lancair 320/360 performance and stability X-Original-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 11:09:52 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0106_01CEBE96.C0729670" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0106_01CEBE96.C0729670 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Another observation, At full reflex, the wing center of pressure moves forward,=20 efectively moving the CG further to the rear,=20 requiring more down elevator,=20 possibly creating negative stability (depending on your CG to start = with). So . . . if you load with a further forward CG with the above in mind, = (trim for fast cruise), you end up with a condition where you do not have enough elevator for = a slow, full flap, full flair landing. Leading me to conclude that the LNC2 does not have enough elevator = authority. Needs more elevator area (the kangaroo tail) or a tail further back. . . . if you want to keep a usable 6" CG range . . . Wolfgang ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Chris Zavatson=20 To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2013 10:53 PM Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Lancair 320/360 performance and stability So I happened to be looking for something unrelated in the FB manual = and came across this on page 10-24: "Lancair flaps are full electric actuated. They are designed to run = from +45 down to -10 up (reflex). Note that the 'faired in position' = for flaps is actually a -7 deg reflex position. ....." My standard build manual is in storage so I could not compare. It = would appear the intent was to be able to go to -10 degrees after all. Chris Zavatson N91CZ 360std http://www.n91cz.net/ From: Christian Meier To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:19 AM Subject: [LML] Re: Lancair 320/360 performance and stability Chris, today I made a picture during Cruise with Autopilot at 7500ft with = following configuration: 770 kg 40l in header, 20l in each wing (80l total), 75kg and 83kg for = pilot and co. Flap was on 7=B0 reflex CG 26,20" =20 My design CG is 22,8 - 30,3 from firewall back, horizontal was = installed - 0.6=B0 So it looks like if I would add more reflex than 7=B0, I would need = more down elevator. So the gain with the higher reflex would be lost with the down = elevator....=20 Christian =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0106_01CEBE96.C0729670 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Another observation,
 
At full reflex, the wing center of = pressure moves=20 forward,
   efectively moving the CG = further to=20 the rear,
   requiring more down = elevator,=20
   possibly creating negative = stability=20 (depending on your CG to start with).
 
So . . . if you load with a = further forward CG=20 with the above in mind, (trim for fast cruise),
   you end up with a = condition where you=20 do not have enough elevator for a slow, full flap, full flair=20 landing.
 
Leading me to conclude that the LNC2 = does not have=20 enough elevator authority.
   Needs more elevator area = (the kangaroo=20 tail) or a tail further back.
   . . . if you want to keep = a usable 6"=20 CG range . . .
 
Wolfgang
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Chris=20 Zavatson
Sent: Sunday, September 29, = 2013 10:53=20 PM
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Lancair = 320/360=20 performance and stability

So I happened to be looking for something unrelated in the FB = manual and=20 came across this on page 10-24:
 
"Lancair flaps are full electric actuated.  They are = designed to run=20 from +45 down to -10 up (reflex).  Note that the 'faired in = position' for=20 flaps is actually a -7 deg reflex position. ....."
 
My standard build manual is in storage so I could not = compare.  It=20 would appear the intent was to be able to go to -10 degrees after = all.
 
Chris Zavatson
N91CZ
360std

From: = Christian Meier=20 <lancair@meier.cc>
To:=20 lml@lancaironline.net
Sent:=20 Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:19 AM
Subject: [LML] Re: Lancair = 320/360=20 performance and stability

Chris,

today I made a picture during Cruise with Autopilot at 7500ft = with=20 following configuration:
770 kg  40l in header, 20l in each wing (80l total), 75kg = and 83kg=20 for pilot and co.
Flap was on 7=B0 reflex  CG 26,20"  
My design CG is 22,8  -  30,3 from firewall back,=20  horizontal was installed - 0.6=B0

So it looks like if I would add more reflex than 7=B0, I would = need more=20 down elevator.
So the gain with the higher reflex would be lost with the down=20 elevator....=20

Christian
 

 

 
 
 
 
=



------=_NextPart_000_0106_01CEBE96.C0729670--