X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 14:24:43 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mta11.charter.net ([216.33.127.80] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTP id 6030722 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 26 Jan 2013 11:21:26 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.33.127.80; envelope-from=troneill@charter.net Received: from imp11 ([10.20.200.11]) by mta11.charter.net (InterMail vM.8.01.05.09 201-2260-151-124-20120717) with ESMTP id <20130126162051.HIXR6169.mta11.charter.net@imp11> for ; Sat, 26 Jan 2013 11:20:51 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([75.132.241.174]) by imp11 with smtp.charter.net id sgLq1k00f3mUFT705gLrSw; Sat, 26 Jan 2013 11:20:51 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=dIr+A5lb c=1 sm=1 a=VxlS/kh5Y2KhHY/Xui1ATg==:17 a=yUnIBFQkZM0A:10 a=hOpmn2quAAAA:8 a=FaaFt3cSxlEA:10 a=dqHgYil_2PbqDjWlHPcA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=jrqcaSWFPMZFe5Ha:21 a=ZSh0RrhieeOFv7Rk:21 a=fEVfclHrMN6A1lMC4H0A:9 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=eow-GObCgQIybZYm:21 a=VxlS/kh5Y2KhHY/Xui1ATg==:117 From: Terrence O'Neill Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-143-805445278 Subject: Re: [LML] 4P AUGERING IN X-Original-Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 10:20:50 -0600 In-Reply-To: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: X-Original-Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) --Apple-Mail-143-805445278 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Just a suggestion to theLNC4 guys: why don;t you dudes get together and = finance a wind tunnel survey of the pitching and yawing moments through = the AOA range? Then fix it. Has Boeing or NASA Langley already done that? terrence On Jan 26, 2013, at 1:07 AM, peter williams wrote: > HI THERE >=20 > THE OSTRICH HAS ITS HEAD IN THE SAND > it seems everyone is avoiding the issue here with this loss of = airplane and pilot. > there is really only one clue at this point; a witness says that the = plane was rotating when it came out the clouds and descended into the = ground. >=20 > i dont pretend to know what happened without the radar track, with the = speed readouts. >=20 > A SCENARIO THAT FITS THE DATA WE HAVE SO FAR > stalling a 4P is serious business. >=20 > MAYBE DISORIENTATION; MAYBE AN AUTOPILOT MALFUNCTION; MAYBE UNEXPECTED = ICING. MAYBE A TEMPORARY LOSS OF POWER all of which could cause a stall. >=20 > imagine what it would be like to be IFR and stall a Lancair = 4/4P/turbine. Not Fun. OK,=20 >=20 > so here you are. nose pointing straight down. you look over at the = airspeed and you see 100 knots (flying speed right???--- wrong, and = maybe wrong) do you have an AOA? it would tell you if you have lift back = on the wings...OH, by the way, did your Gyro(s) tumble. do you have the = ability to cage the Gyro?? or is it self righting. OH and how fast does = that happen. and 100 knots is a silly low number and 200 knots is more = likely within ten seconds. STRAIGHT DOWN. What's that? 41 seconds to the = ground OR 20,000 feet per minute straight down. > (remember that the average 4P stalls and rotates 90-120 degrees and = points straight down) >=20 > SO YOU THINK > ah, stall recovery...add power. well a little power? when that doesnt = work more power. HOW MUCH RIGHT RUDDER DID YOU ADD? BETTER BE A LOT. = remember the turbine engine puts out 1,950 foot pounds of torque v. the = 550 foot pound of torque of the piston engine. even at idle, the turbine = is putting considerable torque. My suspicion is a TORQUE ROLL and still = in a stalled mode. YOW. (sorta like a Snap Roll we have all seen at = Oshkosh; a snap roll is an accelerated Stall. YES STALL) > so you have twenty seconds at most to learn how to do stall recovery = in IFR conditions. >=20 > BOEING BUILD LANCAIRS > when Boeing built three 4P turbine aircraft for their own purposes; = (likely a fast chase plane) they found the tail surfaces unsuitable for = the purpose. (remember the airplane was designed for 350 HP not 750HP) = Boeing redesigned the tail feathers including using a thicker airfoil = for the horizontal surface. > SO IN THE OPINION OF THE PROS AT BOEING, THE REAR SURFACES WERE = INADEQUATE FOR THE PURPOSE=20 >=20 > STALLS > personally i believe that every pilot of these Lancair(s) be required = to see the stall of their airplane. sit in the plane and let a pro do = the job. maybe if you are brave, with the "test pilot" next to you try = the recovery yourself. do it under the hood?? YOW. does your gyro = tumble. YOW again. > it is scary just to contemplate. > at what altitude did you do your approach to stall training? 8,500 = feet, 12.500 feet. there is a reason. >=20 > personally, i would be disinclined to ride in a 4 Turbine. i'm not = smart enough. but if the infidels were at the edge of the airport = shooting Rocket Propelled Grenades at me...then i would gladly take my = chances in a Lancair 4 Turbine. >=20 > the airplane that comes to mind in comparison is the GeeBee; Jimmy = Doolittle said it was the worst airplane he ever flew. AND, just above = the runway it dropped a wing 90 degrees, pointing straight down. BUT, = that wasn't bad enough, it did have one worse trait. as the pilot = slowed down the nose kept rising and required forward stick; just the = opposite of any other airplane. > so there is an airplane made to go fast in 1931. >=20 > peter --Apple-Mail-143-805445278 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Just = a suggestion to theLNC4 guys:  why don;t you dudes get together and = finance a wind tunnel survey of the pitching and yawing moments through = the AOA range?  Then fix it.
Has Boeing or NASA Langley already = done that?
terrence

On Jan 26, 2013, at = 1:07 AM, peter williams wrote:

HI THERE

THE OSTRICH HAS ITS HEAD IN THE SAND
it seems everyone is avoiding the = issue here with this loss of airplane and pilot.
there is really only one clue at this point; a witness says that the plane was rotating when it came out the clouds and descended into the = ground.

i dont pretend to know what happened = without the radar track, with the speed readouts.

A SCENARIO = THAT FITS THE DATA WE HAVE SO FAR
stalling a 4P is serious business.

MAYBE DISORIENTATION; MAYBE AN AUTOPILOT MALFUNCTION; = MAYBE UNEXPECTED ICING. MAYBE A = TEMPORARY LOSS OF POWER all of which could cause a stall.

imagine what it would be like to be IFR and stall a = Lancair 4/4P/turbine.  Not Fun. OK,

so here you are. nose pointing = straight down. you look over at the airspeed and you = see 100 knots (flying speed right???--- wrong, and = maybe wrong) do you have an AOA? it would tell you if you have lift back = on the wings...OH, by the way, did = your Gyro(s) tumble. do you have the ability to cage the Gyro?? or is it = self righting. OH and how fast does that happen. and 100 knots is = a silly low number and 200 knots is more likely = within ten seconds. STRAIGHT DOWN. = What's that? 41 seconds= to the ground OR 20,000 feet per minute straight down.
(remember that the average 4P stalls and rotates 90-120 = degrees and points straight down)

SO YOU THINK
ah, stall recovery...add power. well a little power? when that = doesnt work more power. HOW MUCH RIGHT RUDDER DID YOU ADD? BETTER BE A = LOT. remember the turbine engine puts out 1,950 foot pounds of torque v. the 550 = foot pound of torque of the piston = engine. even at idle, the turbine is putting = considerable torque. My suspicion is a = TORQUE ROLL  and still in a = stalled mode.  YOW.  (sorta = like a Snap Roll we have all seen at Oshkosh; a snap roll is an = accelerated Stall. YES = STALL)
 so you have twenty seconds = at most to learn how to do stall recovery in IFR = conditions.=

= <= /font>BOEING = BUILD LANCAIRS
when Boeing built three 4P turbine aircraft for their own purposes; (likely a fast = chase plane) they found the tail surfaces unsuitable = for the purpose. (remember the = airplane was designed for 350 HP not 750HP) Boeing redesigned the tail feathers including using a thicker airfoil for = the horizontal surface.
SO IN THE OPINION OF THE PROS AT = BOEING, THE REAR = SURFACES WERE INADEQUATE FOR THE = PURPOSE<= /font>

STALLS
personally i believe that every pilot of these Lancair(s) be required to see the stall of their airplane. = sit in the plane and let a pro do the job. maybe if you are brave, with = the "test pilot" next to you try the recovery yourself. = do it under the hood?? YOW. does your gyro tumble. YOW again.
it is scary just = to contemplate.
at what altitude did you do your = approach to stall training? 8,500 feet, = 12.500 feet. there is a reason.

personally, i would be disinclined to ride in a 4 Turbine. i'm not smart enough. but if the infidels were at the edge of the = airport shooting Rocket Propelled = Grenades at me...then i would gladly take my chances in = a Lancair 4 Turbine.

the airplane that comes to mind in = comparison is the GeeBee; Jimmy  Doolittle said it was the worst airplane he ever flew. = AND, just above = the runway it dropped a wing 90 degrees, pointing = straight down. BUT, that wasn't bad = enough,  it did have one worse trait. as the pilot slowed = down the nose kept rising and required forward = stick; just the = opposite of any other airplane.
so there is an airplane made to go fast in 1931.

peter
= <= /font>=

= --Apple-Mail-143-805445278--