X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 11:41:47 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from qmta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.24] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.6) with ESMTP id 5649724 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 23:17:35 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=76.96.62.24; envelope-from=rob@robmurawski.com Received: from omta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.87]) by qmta02.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id ZXF31j00A1swQuc51fH3GH; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 03:17:03 +0000 Received: from wintermute.rob-home.local. ([76.120.176.49]) by omta15.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id ZfGv1j00L14KV5G3bfGwCP; Fri, 13 Jul 2012 03:16:56 +0000 Received: from [192.168.2.13] (visitor3.wireless.rob-home.local [192.168.2.13]) by wintermute.rob-home.local. (8.14.5/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q6D3Goc2025587; Thu, 12 Jul 2012 23:16:50 -0400 References: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-9A116EF4-3571-4D79-8741-E231FF71400D X-Original-Message-Id: X-Original-Cc: "lml@lancaironline.net" X-Mailer: iPad Mail (9B206) From: Rob Murawski Subject: Re: [LML] TAS for Red Line X-Original-Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 23:16:52 -0400 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List X-boxedgarlic-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner-ID: q6D3Goc2025587 X-boxedgarlic-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-boxedgarlic-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-0.999, required 6, autolearn=disabled, ALL_TRUSTED -1.00, HTML_MESSAGE 0.00) X-boxedgarlic-MailScanner-From: rob@robmurawski.com MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1342754210.77656@Cj/X5vZ+TUpOR2TGTWF+yQ --Apple-Mail-9A116EF4-3571-4D79-8741-E231FF71400D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Is this true for Lancairs as well as the Van's aircraft? There was discussi= on on the Vans forum that TAS Vne is unusual, but still a lot of debate. The POH for my 360 lists Vne as KCAS. I'd be hesitant to go against the dat= a I have from Lancair. -Rob On Jul 12, 2012, at 22:26, "Steve Colwell" wrote: > Having coffee with some high time pilots this morning, the subject of Neve= r Exceed Speed came up. Before I read the original Van=E2=80=99s article ye= ars ago, I thought Indicated Airspeed was the indicator=E2=80=A6 WRONG, it i= s True Airspeed. Does your EFIS display TAS or do you have a table for refe= rence??=20 > =20 > http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/hp_limts.pdf=20 > =20 > Steve Colwell Legacy --Apple-Mail-9A116EF4-3571-4D79-8741-E231FF71400D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Is this true for Lancairs a= s well as the Van's aircraft?  There was discussion on the Vans forum t= hat TAS Vne is unusual, but still a lot of debate.

= The POH for my 360 lists Vne as KCAS.  I'd be hesitant to go against th= e data I have from Lancair.

-Rob


On Jul 1= 2, 2012, at 22:26, "Steve Colwell" <mcmess1919@yahoo.com> wrote:

Having coffee with some high time pil= ots this morning, the subject of Never Exceed Speed came up.  Before I r= ead the original Van=E2=80=99s article years ago, I thought Indicated Airspe= ed was the indicator=E2=80=A6  WRONG, it is True Airspeed.  Does y= our EFIS display TAS or do you have a table for reference?? 

 =

http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/hp_limts.pdf  <= o:p>

 

Steve Colwell  Legacy

= --Apple-Mail-9A116EF4-3571-4D79-8741-E231FF71400D--