X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:10:22 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [209.80.4.34] (HELO cptexch.cptgroup.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.16) with ESMTPS id 3905225 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 03:16:20 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.80.4.34; envelope-from=henry@cptgroup.com Received: from cptexch.cptgroup.com ([172.16.100.230]) by cptexch.cptgroup.com ([172.16.100.230]) with mapi; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:14:22 -0700 From: Henry Arjad X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Disposition-Notification-To: Henry Arjad X-Original-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 00:14:22 -0700 Subject: RE: [LML] Wingtip extensions for 320/360? Thread-Topic: [LML] Wingtip extensions for 320/360? Thread-Index: AcpZMJrMPe4TudyhTAWOftH3iFz6vg== X-Original-Message-ID: <20FE9AC7C5D3C44CBC47B31C1A4274D60873E9EE95@cptexch.cptgroup.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_20FE9AC7C5D3C44CBC47B31C1A4274D60873E9EE95cptexchcptgro_" MIME-Version: 1.0 --_000_20FE9AC7C5D3C44CBC47B31C1A4274D60873E9EE95cptexchcptgro_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I recentley purchased a LNC2 360 and was wondering how I can tell if I have= an extended wingtip? Henry Arjad N8AZ KSNA 30Hr+ From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of knea= ded pleasures Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 6:21 AM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Wingtip extensions for 320/360? Dom: The answer to your question, "Does you 360 really stall at 50 KIAS at= gross AUW?", is, probably not! My ASI is not calibrated and at low- altit= ude 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 landing and at al= titude flying heavy. 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. In fact, my 360 just mushes downward and does not drop a wing = so long as the ball is centered. Did the loss of altitude (mush) begin at = 60 mph.. or 59.. or 58? I'm not sure because when stall testing and calibr= ating, I'm watching the ball, ASI, VSI, LRI (my version of AoA), GPS, the r= est of the world outside of the aircraft,... and my ass. Still, the stall = behavior of my long wing is quite nice with 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 Lancairs,I fi= nd copious advantages to the long wing and just a few mild disadvantages. 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 fields -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 more comfortable for pi= lot and passenger) -safer accident speeds (minimum landing speed is reduced) -accidents are more survivable (no one would get hurt at 10 mph) -traffic pattern flying is safer (slower speeds possible because of low= er stall speed) -time to climb to altitude is reduced -engine out glide is improved (more time to "think" and maneuver to alt= ernatives) -more fuel capacity (I don't recommend this option; 1000 mile range is = plenty) The several disadvantages are: -reduced maneuvering speeds (potential to overstress our quite strong w= ings) -reduced wing loading causes (nearly) imperceptible reduced comfort in = chop The above lists are not exhaustive and surely others will add or subtract. Remember that Lance endorsed the long-wing which suggests that the longer w= ings don't challenge structural integrity in our planes. Also remember tha= t it was not by accident that Nature designed long-distance birds to have l= ong, thin, narrow wings; they are simply more efficient and energy efficien= t 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; you won= 't remove them after you fly them. Greg Nelson (LNC2) ------------------------------------------------------------ G'day Dan, Does you 360 really stall at 50 KIAS at gross AUW? Cheers Dom Crain VH-CZJ --_000_20FE9AC7C5D3C44CBC47B31C1A4274D60873E9EE95cptexchcptgro_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'>I recentley purchased a LNC2 360 and = was wondering how I can tell if I have an extended wingtip?

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'> 

Henry= Arjad

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'>N8AZ  KSNA  30Hr+

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'> 

 

From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline= .net] On Behalf Of kneaded pleasures
Sent: Thursday, October 29, = 2009 6:21 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Wingtip exten= sions for 320/360?

 

Dom:  The answer to your question, "= Does you 360 really stall at 50 KIAS at gross AUW?", is, probably not!&nb= sp; My ASI is not calibrated and at low- 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 landing and at altitude flying heavy.

 

The reason I mention this is that there is perhaps one additional, unmentioned advanta= ge to the long wing 360 and that is the stall behavior; it is quite benign.  In fact, my 360 just mushes downward and does not drop a wi= ng so long as the ball is centered.  Did the loss of altitude (mush) begin at 60 mph.. or 59.. or 58?  I'm not sure beca= use when stall testing and calibrating, I'm watching the ball, ASI, VSI, LRI = (my version of AoA), GPS, the rest of the world outside of the aircraft,= ... and my ass.  Still, the stall behavior of my long wing is quite nice with no surprises.  Perhaps the long wings help to retard any sharp = drop of wing OKA, snap roll.<= o:p>

----------------------------------------------= -----------------------------

 

Dan:  Having flown frequently in various = 200 and 360 style of Lancairs,I find copious advantages to the long wing and = just a few mild disadvantages.

 

The long wind advantages are:

    -slower takeoffs

    -slower landings=

    -less tire wear (takeoffs a= re shorter)

    -less brake wear (landings = are shorter)

    -lower stall speed (57 mph = in my 360 at gross)

    -all of above permit more o= ptions to use short fields

    -faster climb (more wing li= ft)

    -longer glide (more wing ar= ea)

    -faster speeds at all altit= udes (lower angle of att= ack at all speeds)

    -slower lateral roll rate (= makes chop and turns more comfortable for pilot and passenger)

    -safer accident speeds (min= imum landing speed is reduced)

    -accidents are more surviva= ble (no one would get hurt at 10 mph)

    -traffic pattern flying is = safer (slower speeds possible because of lower stall speed)

    -time to climb to altitude = is reduced

    -engine out glide is improv= ed (more time to "think" and maneuver to alternatives)<= /span>

    -more fuel capacity (I= don't recommend this option; 1000 mile range is plenty)<= /font>

 

The several disadvantages are:

    -reduced maneuvering speeds (potential to overstress our quite strong wings)=

    -reduced wing loading c= auses (nearly) imperceptible reduced comfort in chop

 

The above lists are not exhaustive and surely = others will add or subtract.

 

Remember that Lance endorsed the long-wing whi= ch suggests that the longer wings don't challenge structural integrity in our planes.  Also remember that it was not by acci= dent that Nature designed long-distance birds to have long, thin, na= rrow wings; they are simply more efficient and energy efficient at flying.  OTOH, if you fly gut-wrenching, severe "G's", the= n long wings will not answer.

 

Dan, I recommend that you not make those longe= r wingtips removable; you won't remove them after you fly them.   Greg Nelson  (LNC2)

------= ------------------------------------------------------ 

 =

G’day Dan,

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

Cheers

Dom Crain

VH-CZJ

 

--_000_20FE9AC7C5D3C44CBC47B31C1A4274D60873E9EE95cptexchcptgro_--