X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 18:53:16 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-d21.mx.aol.com ([205.188.144.207] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.9) with ESMTP id 1111214 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 12 May 2006 18:38:14 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.144.207; envelope-from=Sky2high@aol.com Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-d21.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r7.5.) id q.360.4680825 (48576) for ; Fri, 12 May 2006 18:37:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <360.4680825.31966827@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 18:37:27 EDT Subject: Re: [LML] Re: IVP Crash X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1147473447" X-Mailer: 9.0 Security Edition for Windows sub 5300 X-Spam-Flag: NO -------------------------------1147473447 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 5/12/2006 4:13:14 P.M. Central Standard Time, troneill@charter.net writes: Yes, stability, and controllability. I'd add some comments. CAFE flew Fred Baron's N9BF at fwd CG, aft CG, and measured elevator stick forces per G, and graphed htat and compared it to similar results from a Cessna 150 and a Wittman W-10 Tailwind. They found the L320 at aft CGs had a greatly diminished stick force required. He also added "Momentary distractions cause the plane to wander more in pitch attitude." Two conditions often related to unintentional entry into stall-spins. Somewhere also I think a former AF test pilot did a simmilar analysis of the flight controls and he commented that the elevator forces were lighter than those programmed into prsent-day fighters. So, here's an area that could be improved. I'm trying to do that with my L235, adding anti-servo trim tab area to the aft part of the elevator... which will increase the pilot's required pounds of pull per G. Will report on the results. Terrence, Some of us that fly 320/360s with spring managed elevator trim know just how sensitive pitch can be in the spring dead band. For myself, I wouldn't want it any other way. At slow speeds, the proposed anti servo should not be any more effective than the spring as the forces will be lightened. I like them just the way they are - always light. This is a reminder that one must pay attention during any flight regime. Scott Krueger AKA Grayhawk Lancair N92EX IO320 CS Prop Slow Build 1989, Flown 1996 Aurora, IL (KARR) PS, The bob weight adds enough force during higher G maneuvers. -------------------------------1147473447 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a message dated 5/12/2006 4:13:14 P.M. Central Standard Time,=20 troneill@charter.net writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2> =20 Yes, stability, and controllability.  I'd add some comments.
 = ;=20   CAFE flew Fred Baron's N9BF at fwd CG, aft CG, and measured elevato= r=20
stick forces per G, and graphed htat and compared it to similar result= s=20 from
a Cessna 150 and a Wittman W-10 Tailwind.  They found the L3= 20=20 at aft CGs
had a greatly diminished stick force required.  He als= o=20 added "Momentary
distractions cause the plane to wander more in pitch=20 attitude." Two
conditions often related to unintentional entry into=20 stall-spins.
Somewhere also I think a former AF test pilot did a simmi= lar=20 analysis of the
flight controls and he commented that  the elevat= or=20 forces were lighter than
those programmed into prsent-day fighters.&nb= sp;=20 So, here's an area that could be
improved.  I'm trying to do that= =20 with my L235, adding anti-servo trim tab
area to the aft part of the=20 elevator... which will increase the pilot's
required pounds of pull pe= r=20 G.  Will report on the results.
Terrence,
 
Some of us that fly 320/360s with spring managed elevator trim know jus= t=20 how sensitive pitch can be in the spring dead band.  For myself, I woul= dn't=20 want it any other way.  At slow speeds, the proposed anti servo sh= ould=20 not be any more effective than the spring as the forces will be lightened.&n= bsp;=20 I like them just the way they are - always light.  This is a reminder t= hat=20 one must pay attention during any flight regime.=20
 
Scott Krueger=20 AKA Grayhawk
Lancair N92EX IO320 CS Prop
Slow Build 1989, Flown 1996=20
Aurora, IL (KARR)

PS, The bob weight adds enough force during hig= her=20 G maneuvers.
-------------------------------1147473447--