From: marklisalally@mindspring.com
Message-ID: <003401be4ea3$0de06c80$d5371e26@u2kmz>
To: "lancair mail" <lancair.list@olsusa.com>
Subject: Fw: ES manual reply  (very late)
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 06:56:21 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>

-----Original Message-----
From: marklisalally@mindspring.com <marklisalally@mindspring.com>
To: lancair.list@olsua.com <lancair.list@olsua.com>
Date: Monday, February 01, 1999 9:39 PM
Subject: ES manual reply (very late)


>In response to Roberts letter on the H.S. incidence error in the manual , I
>personally am not under the ridiculous impression that
>a .6 degree error in incidence will cause me to crash and burn.
>What I meant by fixing it before it was to late is was, Fixing it before it
>is to late to make it right.
>I will be paying for this plane for the next 20 years,and hopefully flying
>it for the rest of my life, I don't think its unreasonable to want it to be
>as perfect as it can be. Also the fact that I extended my fuel tanks by two
>bays in no way made the error in the manual less wrong, It just made the
>consequences or the error more brutal. On the subject of extended fuel
tanks
>on the ES, My understanding from talking with the factory is that its not a
>question of whether the wings will hold the extra load,but rather this
>configuration has not been tested for wing flutter.
>they think it will reduce the chance of flutter but they cannot confirm
this
>because its not been tested.
>  What I purchased was a Lancair ES kitplane. EXPERIMENTAL is a
>classification, A classification that gives both Lancair and the builder
>many advantages( and I love this) , Without these advantages I personally
>would never own an airplane,BUT in my opinion I don't believe the FAA
>intended that every chapter in a construction manuals to be an experiment
in
>construction.
>  I encourage every one to Keep submitting   letters with any manual
errors.
>I honestly believe that
>this can only help everyone. Including Lancair. Just last week alone I
>learned #1 H.S. incidence should be set at -.6 degrees #2 the front seats
>should be set back. #3 the landing gear fairings supplied with my kit will
>be hard to fit (thanks Robert).
>   I love my lancair ES and would encourage anyone considering building one
>to step up to the plate. But I dont believe we should expect any less from
>Lancair than we do from any other vendor, and that includes correcting
>mistake in the construction manuals when they know about them. If we don't
>express our views how can we expect it to get any better.
>  Don't get me wrong hear,  I think lancairs customer support is very good,
>but I also believe they would not have to answer so many repeat questions
>time after time if the manuals were corrected.
>
>MARK LALLY ES15%
>