X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 16:19:07 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from web60013.mail.yahoo.com ([209.73.178.76] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with SMTP id 2582349 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:39:39 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.73.178.76; envelope-from=mattreeves@yahoo.com Received: (qmail 40761 invoked by uid 60001); 15 Dec 2007 14:38:55 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=dc7TH3kKdxOn6LoSaVP6eLpdNyM9PnkqeVYI6jC5udc0Uh0CNfPv7wqabmA5jDCMhd8wHhTx3R4b6RBrF27+1ohQwnF2COa+gYFvsuvwea2FMsR23ulbOi+HH05DvDP3JYzvbxCbaqhlOPzAppeEHthD9UOQlwKreM/x9JOnShM=; X-YMail-OSG: i.z_sdUVM1noBGt1FwQAK_AMqqUXD3y_urMdJO8faBbVn0w4byX7MSOwuGFYKOHV8nFUhgaVuDNn4LM7gseBKEo6qaPqoXX6Pz_QYDwACTYL4C2Yltetfu6wsSwBT5M- Received: from [74.34.211.8] by web60013.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 06:38:55 PST X-Original-Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 06:38:55 -0800 (PST) From: Matt Reeves Subject: Re: [LML] Re: FW: 320/360 Elevator RIGGING X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-745341553-1197729535=:39923" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Original-Message-ID: <327368.39923.qm@web60013.mail.yahoo.com> --0-745341553-1197729535=:39923 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit If Ross says it's ok. It's probably ok. He knows his stuff, however, I do remember reading about a fatality a few years back and the report said the lead bob weight was installed upside-down. I'll see if I can find it on the NTSB.gov and link it. Possibly there were other factors but I do specifically remember the bob weight was installed incorrectly. I guess if you have all the travel you need and nothing touches anything else, you're fine. Matt Bryan Wullner wrote: Or do what I did. Reverse the bob weight from how the plans so it. This brings it down closer to the Control rod. The point of having the bob weight low and close to the push rod is to give a heavier feel to the elevator control. My control tube was about an inch too short so if I mounted the bob weight the way the plans showed (on top of the arms) then it was sitting a little high off the control tube. So I talked to Ross and Lancair and he said I could turn it over to get the weight lower and closer to the control tube. I did that and now it sits about 3/4" off the control tube. I think I can live with that over rebuilding the control tube, although I haven't made this my final decision yet. ----- Original Message ----- From: Matt Reeves To: lml@lancaironline.net Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 1:42 PM Subject: [LML] Re: FW: 320/360 Elevator RIGGING Garry, I hate to suggest it, but you could make a longer push rod. Matt LHenney wrote: Garry, Yes, in this case, more is fine. I believe that quote came because there was a guy who had his bob weight in upside down (appearing right side up, btw). He was unable to get enough forward stick authority to exit his stall testing and went crunch. IMHO, the 1/4" is affectively a "no interference" requirement. Larry -----Original Message----- From: Laznicka, Garry [MCCUS] [mailto:GLaznic@MCCUS.JNJ.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 9:05 AM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: 320/360 Elevator RIGGING Looking at the page 15-28 Rev 6/04-01-99 in "Lancair 320FB manual" where Figure-9a is depicted, it's specified there that with full elevator down (11 degrees) the Elevator Idler arm (which supports the Bob weight) to be 1/4" from Rear push/pull tube. My question is: Would that be acceptable to have this distance at 0.59" Or is it absolutely critical that I have it at 0.25" I am maxed out on push-rods travel at this point. Thank you in advance for your suggestions and advice. Regards, Garry V. Laznicka L-360c 85% -- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. --0-745341553-1197729535=:39923 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
If Ross says it's ok.  It's probably ok.  He knows his stuff, however, I do remember reading about a fatality a few years back and the report said the lead bob weight was installed upside-down.  I'll see if I can find it on the NTSB.gov and link it.   Possibly there were other factors but I do specifically remember the bob weight was installed incorrectly.  I guess if you have all the travel you need and nothing touches anything else, you're fine.
 
Matt

Bryan Wullner <sbej@verizon.net> wrote:
Or do what I did.  Reverse the bob weight from how the plans so it. This brings it down closer to the Control rod.  The point of having the bob weight low and close to the push rod is to give a heavier feel to the elevator control.  My control tube was about an inch too short so if I mounted the bob weight the way the plans showed (on top of the arms) then it was sitting a little high off the control tube. So I talked to Ross and Lancair and he said I could turn it over to get the weight lower and closer to the control tube. I did that and now it sits about 3/4" off the control tube.  I think I can live with that over rebuilding the control tube, although I haven't made this my final decision yet.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 1:42 PM
Subject: [LML] Re: FW: 320/360 Elevator RIGGING

Garry,
 
I hate to suggest it, but you could make a longer push rod.
 
Matt

LHenney <LHenney@charter.net> wrote:
Garry,

Yes, in this case, more is fine. I believe that quote came because there
was a guy who had his bob weight in upside down (appearing right side up,
btw). He was unable to get enough forward stick authority to exit his stall
testing and went crunch.

IMHO, the 1/4" is affectively a "no interference" requirement.

Larry

-----Original Message-----
From: Laznicka, Garry [MCCUS] [mailto:GLaznic@MCCUS.JNJ.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 9:05 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: 320/360 Elevator RIGGING

Looking at the page 15-28 Rev 6/04-01-99 in "Lancair 320FB manual" where
Figure-9a is depicted, it's specified there that with full elevator down (11
degrees) the Elevator Idler arm (which supports the Bob weight) to be 1/4"
from Rear push/pull tube. My question is:

Would that be acceptable to have this distance at 0.59"
Or is it absolutely critical that I have it at 0.25"

I am maxed out on push-rods travel at this point.

Thank you in advance for your suggestions and advice.
Regards,
Garry V. Laznicka
L-360c 85%



--
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. --0-745341553-1197729535=:39923--