X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 09:21:12 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.199.141] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.16) with SMTP id 3904036 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:24:45 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.142.199.141; envelope-from=kneadedpleasures@sbcglobal.net Received: (qmail 43285 invoked by uid 60001); 29 Oct 2009 12:24:09 -0000 DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=W1lDIIvdNDIuZvE2YrDSktQHbIWYCOYgO/RC1TMz5mpqtXfo9FMuOsuxdgUZ39o7/UPZGpJOm81l8dn2QKQaz3Bke3s5oH5/b7307mTpkctbPiNXqptEf6BEKigScPW9ybNBnvhn6BVJpDHtsgGK28VvhXt6UL9NbzQotKjr1us=; X-Original-Message-ID: <694894.41943.qm@web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: pu5m4ckVM1mIm1Jzl7oLPh0Jgl25Fmzx3VZUI_E86l51oplUODzJ0ihG_74NUGArSJW5cs4pZk1RV9Y1t2Xmjm8myhCwD8yiFvsadHrf1jcviMiUOvqECibuczjaqBVlEJfGTUzMYqeaST6KzKqjiHu7IdX13HNo49guSRJSFwM7oS5jrtAPFEu2B.dha2ePtGJqzuBOFiW6Cqx.AuNO3RQdm_TZcyYm6qC.EdIGLYrZJXtsL1REOBOPLHqjIu7GEMLRLSRjh_Z4xl9_4q_HGEcM.RYfB6EV6596tOErXTI7jyqU0sPFg9XdPsjVytloreiBV1gmgjyEcn_idatLrMDxPvraXYNHwAFMCC3_tcxAYHXJVn28SjoylK0uez.V0ukJSD_6EQ-- Received: from [71.145.156.213] by web81501.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 29 Oct 2009 05:24:09 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailClassic/7.0.14 YahooMailWebService/0.7.361.4 X-Original-Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 05:24:09 -0700 (PDT) From: kneaded pleasures Subject: Wingtip extensions for 320/360? X-Original-To: Lancair List MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-39342583-1256819049=:41943" --0-39342583-1256819049=:41943 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dom:=C2=A0 The answer to your question, "Does you 360 really stall at 50 KI= AS at gross AUW?", is, probably not!=C2=A0 My ASI is not calibrated and at = low- altitude cruise seems to lag the GPS by 12 to 13 mph.=C2=A0 The ASI is= , however does indicate "approximately" 57 mph when lift is lost both on la= nding and at altitude flying heavy. =C2=A0 The reason I mention this is that there is perhaps one additional, unmentio= ned advantage to the long wing 360 and that is the stall behavior; it is qu= ite benign.=C2=A0 In fact, my 360 just mushes downward and does not drop a = wing so long as the ball is centered.=C2=A0 Did the loss of altitude (mush)= =C2=A0begin at 60 mph..=C2=A0or 59.. or 58?=C2=A0 I'm not sure because when= stall testing and calibrating, I'm watching the ball, ASI, VSI, LRI (my ve= rsion of AoA),=C2=A0GPS, the rest of the world outside of the aircraft,... = and my ass.=C2=A0 Still, the stall behavior of my long wing is quite nice w= ith no surprises.=C2=A0 Perhaps the long wings help to retard any sharp dro= p of wing OKA, snap roll. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- =C2=A0 Dan:=C2=A0 Having flown frequently in various 200 and 360 style of Lancairs= ,I find copious advantages to the long wing and just a few mild disadvantag= es. =C2=A0 The long wind advantages are: =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -slower takeoffs=20 =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -slower landings =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -less tire wear (takeoffs are shorter) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -less brake wear (landings are shorter) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -lower stall speed (57 mph in my 360 at gross) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -all of above permit more options to use short fields =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -faster climb (more wing lift) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -longer glide (more wing area) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -faster speeds at all altitudes (lower angle of attack a= t all speeds) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -slower lateral roll rate (makes chop and turns more com= fortable for pilot and passenger) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -safer accident speeds (minimum landing speed is reduced= ) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -accidents are more survivable (no one=C2=A0would get=C2= =A0hurt at 10 mph) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -traffic pattern flying is safer (slower speeds possible= because of lower stall speed) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -time to climb to altitude is reduced =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -engine out glide is improved (more time to "think" and = maneuver to alternatives) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -more fuel capacity=C2=A0(I don't recommend this option;= 1000 mile range=C2=A0is plenty) =C2=A0 The several disadvantages are: =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -reduced maneuvering speeds (potential to overstress our= quite strong wings) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 -reduced wing loading causes (nearly) imperceptible redu= ced comfort in chop =C2=A0 The above lists are not exhaustive and surely others will add or subtract. =C2=A0 Remember that Lance endorsed the long-wing which suggests that=C2=A0the lon= ger wings=C2=A0don't challenge structural integrity=C2=A0in our planes.=C2= =A0 Also remember that it was not by accident that=C2=A0Nature designed=C2= =A0long-distance birds to have long, thin, narrow wings; they are simply mo= re efficient and energy efficient=C2=A0at flying.=C2=A0 OTOH, if you fly gu= t-wrenching, severe "G's", then long wings will not answer. =C2=A0 Dan, I recommend that you not make those longer wingtips removable; you won= 't remove them after you fly them.=C2=A0=C2=A0 Greg Nelson =C2=A0(LNC2) ------------------------------------------------------------=C2=A0=20 =C2=A0=20 G=E2=80=99day Dan,=20 Does you 360 really stall at 50 KIAS at gross AUW?=20 Cheers=20 Dom Crain=20 VH-CZJ --0-39342583-1256819049=:41943 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dom:  The answer to your question, "Does you 360 really stall at 50 KIA= S at gross AUW?", is, probably not!  My ASI is not calibrated and at l= ow- altitude cruise seems to lag the GPS by 12 to 13 mph.  The ASI is,= however does indicate "approximately" 57 mph when lift is lost both on lan= ding and at altitude flying heavy.
<= /SPAN> 
T= he reason I mention this is that there is perhaps one additional, unmention= ed advantage to the long wing 360 and that is the stall behavior; it is qui= te benign.  In fact, my 360 just mushes downward and does not drop a w= ing so long as the ball is centered.  Did the loss of altitude (mush)&= nbsp;begin at 60 mph.. or 59.. or 58?  I'm not sure because when = stall testing and calibrating, I'm watching the ball, ASI, VSI, LRI (my ver= sion of AoA), GPS, the rest of the world outside of the aircraft,... a= nd my ass.  Still, the stall behavior of my long wing is quite nice wi= th no surprises.  Perhaps the long wings help to retard any sharp drop= of wing OKA, snap roll.
----------------------------------------------------------------------= -----
 
Dan:  Having flown frequently in various 200 and 360 style of Lan= cairs,I find copious advantages to the long wing and just a few mild disadv= antages.
 
The long wind advantages are:
    -slower takeoffs
    -slower landings
    -less tire wear (takeoffs are shorter)
    -less brake wear (landings are shorter)
    -lower stall speed (57 mph in my 360 at gross)
    -all of above permit more options to use short fiel= ds
    -faster climb (more wing lift)
    -longer glide (more wing area)
    -faster speeds at all altitudes (lower angle of attack at all speeds)
    -slower lateral roll rate (makes chop and turns mor= e comfortable for pilot and passenger)
    -safer accident speeds (minimum landing speed is re= duced)
    -accidents are more survivable (no one would g= et hurt at 10 mph)
    -traffic pattern flying is safer (slower speeds pos= sible because of lower stall speed)
    -time to climb to altitude is reduced
    -engine out glide is improved (more time to "think"= and maneuver to alternatives)
    -more fuel capacity (I don't recommend this op= tion; 1000 mile range is plenty)
 
The several disadvantages are:
    -reduced maneuvering speeds (potential to overstres= s our quite strong wings)
    -reduced wing loading<= /SPAN> causes (nearly) imperceptible reduced comfort in chop
 
The above lists are not exhaustive and surely others will add or subtr= act.
 
Remember that Lance endorsed the long-wing which suggests that th= e longer wings don't challenge structural integrity in our planes= .  Also remember that it was not by accident that Nature designed=  long-distance birds to have long, thin, narrow wings; they are simply= more efficient and energy efficient at flying.  OTOH, if you fly= gut-wrenching, severe "G's", then long wings will not answer.
 
Dan, I recommend that you not make those longer wingtips removable; yo= u won't remove them after you fly them.   Greg Nelson  (LNC2= )

------------------------------------------------------= ------ =20

 =20

G=E2=80=99day Dan,=20

Does you 360 really stall at 50 KIAS at gross AUW?=20

Cheers=20

Dom Crain=20

VH-CZJ

--0-39342583-1256819049=:41943--