Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:29:23 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [208.26.41.11] (HELO perigee.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.5) with SMTP id 1983293 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:24:28 -0500 Received: from nospam.perigee.net ([206.229.254.25]) by perigee.net ; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:24:26 -0500 Received: from perigee.net (secure.perigee.net [206.229.254.21]) by nospam.perigee.net (8.12.5/8.12.5) with SMTP id h0ELOOnU025153 for ; Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:24:24 -0500 From: "John Schroeder" X-Original-Sender: schroej@perigee.net Reply-to: jschroeder@perigee.net X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" X-Original-Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 16:23:49 -0500 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Wing Loading mysteries X-Mailer: DMailWeb Web to Mail Gateway 2.8a, http://netwinsite.com/top_mail.htm X-Original-Message-id: <3e247fe5.16d0.0@perigee.net> X-User-Info: 68.100.140.203 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rcpt-To: Lorn - The numbers for the F-105 are right on. High key on a 360 degree, circling overhead simulated flameout pattern was 12,000 AGL. The power-on final approach speed was 185 KCAS plus fuel (2k/1000# over 4,000# baseline). Touchdown speed was 165 KCAS. I do not recall anyone making it on a bonafide SFO. One guy tried in Germany but ejected on final approach when his airspeed bled off to where the controls locked up. The ram air turbine/pump that powered the emergency hydraulic flight control system would no longer put out enough pressure to power the actuators. Flew many hours of low level nav - 500' and below - at 420 to 600 KCAS and the turbulence was rarely a problem. However, the stab aug system was one of the best ever and helped immensely to dampen it out. Cheers, John Schroeder >F-105 200 50,000 Glides at 250 kts Eject > flys btwn 200 & 1,600 > leave leading edge slats down below mach 1 > watch speed, no indication of exceeding mach 1 > you will never feel turbulence > >What all is the difference between these planes? Can we draw flight >characteristics conclusions? >