Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #49045
From: Lorn H Olsen <lorn@dynacomm.us>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: Small tail vs. large tail
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2008 16:26:45 -0400
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
Mark & Scott,

My empty CG is 22.3". With a 150# pilot and 8 gal in the header I would be at 24.5".

My fore and aft CG limits are 24.9" and 30.6".

With my harmonic dampener, Aero Composites prop, me (250#), 20# of tools up front, 5 more in back and full header. I get: 25.7". I land like this some times but can only use 25° of flap. No wonder I don't have enough elevator.

Loaded up a lot to 1,900#, my CG is 29.5" and thats pretty far back.

Lorn

From: Sky2high@aol.com
Date: September 30, 2008 10:47:55 AM GMT-04:00

Mark,

Even more interrrrresting........

What is your empty weight CG?  Mine is 20.8"  Also, with a 150# pilot and 8 gal in the header my CG would be out of the forward envelope at 23.4"" (12% MAC).  BTW, I have a 12# harmonic damper on the flywheel along with the heaviest Hartzell prop.

What is your flap setting for these landings?  Moving the flaps up somewhat can change the pitch authority and I wonder if you have tried using the flaps to assist in elevator authority.

Scott

In a message dated 9/29/2008 12:14:46 P.M. Central Daylight Time, mjrav@comcast.net writes:
I suppose I qualify at 150 lbs.
Std 360, battery in the footwell, Hartzel CS prop.

Generally, I make a point to NOT have all fuel in the header on a lightweight landing.  Having it 1/4 to 1/2 full is safe enough.
What happens is that I run out of aft stick travel in the flare and will have a hard landing if I'm not very close to wheels down.
The further foreward the CG, the faster the landing speed must be.  Mostly, it's just hard on the tires.
.
.
Mark Ravinski
360    1447 hrs   1077 of it mine.
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster