X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 13:30:22 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nm33-vm7.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com ([72.30.239.207] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTPS id 6031814 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 27 Jan 2013 12:29:17 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=72.30.239.207; envelope-from=bill_burger@yahoo.com Received: from [98.139.214.32] by nm33.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Jan 2013 17:28:44 -0000 Received: from [98.139.212.217] by tm15.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Jan 2013 17:28:44 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1026.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 27 Jan 2013 17:28:44 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 665603.77266.bm@omp1026.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 61153 invoked by uid 60001); 27 Jan 2013 17:28:44 -0000 DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=VgmJq7ke8/MxnjLUzOOMRVdS2rTocwyhyQmV/ySgx9iAwWfkNqZ2iVb6v0Q5JiEGHWD64K6CfxUdvGb5RrreHnp3grFK9AyU5OoGnvfdXVz1gF6SZf+258vDwOgXWxRclv49lM6TzjTcQxiuisb6YrQv4jgwemQHgSPGfuPTZkc=; X-YMail-OSG: rrM_rwcVM1l2ptSNE9V_nAoOTBIkTJJ7DSKmcWfSL.kECjj twFNcXfpxWZSGdXl8t4Vdsd7uJYLm.82u74xKbwlFzUAFda5ykTCLNREgIFV TX_s5quqZ22q39pAX7GVY0_jiR1hzAMnXGRLfTF.PdikryuO1nJs6E3w5adV t6zNTeqdYJPg5dtx0AR0huCclzmi5rvhY7UDDvYEEsa8sWdTUT3gYyZS9ead ZfKwwC86Xrbvs1SoX6KLrpI9MTbd9seIoZWHXcMUXyc5oiyVa9kdneQUDFoP geYPHT0AIqrUVEmSqW_yUn3PIWwofHZ8bbUmFBPeqYAhlwu3BO1rcpnsn8tx 3Io4LfwgyQofGpMCKdrdkuS.mgqp2ceUhhfe28glLzqQLXESASrCjL9Y_Dyu 5UJf8.bwyi3Fet0xw_TZfOpaICusE6B4p7SnMtKZlCvFWCQsMB3z6yjxTwQD ns7IqWfcSgMSfxwZml7ef3i9DrRSXs6vc8NmEJCOWEMlNuqyexcEoLlHEfJQ ICyZ.e0dPFzU1ZcYmgkGs Received: from [98.207.152.214] by web161703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sun, 27 Jan 2013 09:28:44 PST X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 001.001,Rm9yIGFsbCB0aGUgTEFJViBidWlsZGVycyAoRVMgYWxzbyApLCBJIGhhdmUgYSBNaWtlIEN1c3RhcmQgbmV3LCB1bnVzZWQgY2FyYm9uIGRvdWJsZSBzdHJha2UgYXZhaWxhYmxlLsKgUGxlYXNlIGNvbnRhY3QgbWUgb2ZmbGluZSBpZiBpbnRlcmVzdGVkLgpUaGFua3MuCsKgCkJpbGxfYnVyZ2VyQHlhaG9vLmNvbQo0MDgtODkyLTg5OTIKIAoKX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KIEZyb206IERhdmlkIFdlaW5zd2VpZyA8d2VpbnN3ZWlnZEBnbWFpbC5jb20.ClRvOiBsbWxAbGFuY2Fpcm8BMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.130.494 References: X-Original-Message-ID: <1359307724.53220.YahooMailNeo@web161703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> X-Original-Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 09:28:44 -0800 (PST) From: Bill Burger Reply-To: Bill Burger Subject: Re: [LML] Re: 4P AUGERING IN X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-67045276-974124906-1359307724=:53220" ---67045276-974124906-1359307724=:53220 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable For all the LAIV builders (ES also ), I have a Mike Custard new, unused car= bon double strake available.=A0Please contact me offline if interested.=0AT= hanks.=0A=A0=0ABill_burger@yahoo.com=0A408-892-8992=0A =0A=0A______________= __________________=0A From: David Weinsweig =0ATo: lm= l@lancaironline.net =0ASent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 3:59 AM=0ASubject: [L= ML] Re: 4P AUGERING IN=0A =0A=0APlease don't bash a plane in which you hav= e never flown. =A0It just perpetuates bad stereotypes that the Lancair comm= unity does not need. =A0As the original owner of a propjet, it makes me ver= y concerned every time a propjet(or any Lancair) goes down. =A0However, I f= ind my propjet to be a very honest airplane in that she does exactly what I= tell her to do. =A0Yes, the margin for error is much less than most planes= and it must be respected. Sudden large power changes must be avoided, clos= e attention to the ball especially at slow speeds is required, and IMHO it = is imperative to stay away from stall scenarios.=0A=0AHaving followed the L= ancair community since 1999 and being a part of it since I bought kit LIV-5= 01 in 2001, I am convinced that the overwhelming majority of accidents are = pilot error-stall/spin, flying into thunderstorms or the occasional fuel de= privation-sometimes running out of fuel or the engine not getting the fuel = due to poor build or unporting of the engine. =A0The Lancair fuel system de= sign in the propjet has received mixed reviews due to the belly tank design= . =A0The wings gravity feed the belly tank which then feeds the engine. =A0= If one empties the wings and uses fuel from the belly tank, stops to refuel= then takes off before the wings have a chance to fill the belly tank, it i= s possible to unport the engine particularly with a high deck angle on clim= b out. =A0I have heard the fuel running into my 34 gallon belly tank from t= he wings on the few occasions that I have used fuel from the belly. =A0It c= an take a while to refill the belly while getting the air out. This can also lead to a false sense of full fuel unless watch= ed carefully.=0A=0AI view these issues as lack of situational awareness whe= ther on the ground or in the air and not innate problems with the plane as = long as one understands their plane. =A0Perhaps this relates to the higher = crash rate among second owners as well as lower time in a specific plane. A= s you point out the tail can be overpowered by the turbine engine. =A0To he= lp combat this, we installed Mike Custard's strakes as well as his vertical= fin extension thus increasing tail authority. =A0I suspect this helps the = yaw issue to some degree.=A0=0A=0AThe stall scenarios that you describe sca= re me and should scare any pilot but this situation can happen in any plane= though admittedly more likely in a IV series due to the tight envelope and= small margin of error but when we fly these planes we accept this risk and= hopefully do everything to minimize it and fly them the way they need to b= e flown.=0A=0AThere have been numerous aircraft that have gotten a bad repu= tation over the years due to pilots not flying them correctly. =A0The MU-2 = and Robinson R22 helicopter(in which I have over 500 hours) in particular c= ome to mind. =A0Once proper training was mandated the accident rates went w= ay down. =A0If you choose not to fly in a IVPT, that is a personal choice b= ut please do not equate bad(or poorly trained) pilots with a bad aircraft. = =A0=0A=0AThe IV series and particularly the Propjet is not a docile plane b= ut when flown within its envelope there is nothing as efficient and fun for= the price in a true personal traveling plane.=A0=0A=0ADavid Weinsweig, MD= =0AN750DW Propjet =A0285 hours=0A=0AOn Jan 26, 2013, at 2:07 AM, peter will= iams wrote:=0A=0A=0AHI THERE=0A>=0A>THE OSTRICH HAS ITS = HEAD IN THE SAND=0A>it seems everyone is avoiding the issue here with this = loss of airplane and pilot.=0A>there is really only one clue at this point;= a witness says that the plane was rotating when itcame out the clouds and = descended into the ground.=0A>=0A>i dont pretend to know what happenedwitho= ut the radar track, with the speed readouts.=0A>=0A>A SCENARIO THAT FITS TH= E DATA WE HAVE SOFAR=0A>stalling a 4P is serious business.=0A>=0A>MAYBE DIS= ORIENTATION; MAYBE AN AUTOPILOT MALFUNCTION; MAYBE UNEXPECTED ICING. MAYBE = A TEMPORARY LOSS OF POWER all of which could cause a stall.=0A>=0A>imagine = what it would be like to be IFR and stall a Lancair 4/4P/turbine.=A0 Not Fu= n. OK, =0A>=0A>sohere youare. nose pointing straight down. you look over at= the airspeed and you see 100 knots (flying speed right???--- wrong, and may= be wrong) do you have an AOA? it would tell you if you have lift back on th= e 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 t= en seconds. STRAIGHT DOWN. What's that? 41 seconds to the ground OR 20,000 = feet per minute straight down.=0A>(remember that the average 4P stalls and = rotates 90-120 degrees and points straight down)=0A>=0A>SO YOU THINK=0A>ah,= stall recovery...add power. well a little power? when that doesnt work mor= e power. HOW MUCH RIGHT RUDDER DID YOU ADD? BETTER BE A LOT. remember the t= urbine 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 consider= able torque. My suspicion is a TORQUE ROLL=A0 and still in a stalled mode.= =A0 YOW.=A0 (sorta like a Snap Roll we haveall seen at Oshkosh; a snap roll= is an accelerated Stall. YES STALL)=0A>=A0so you have twenty seconds at mo= st to learn how to do stall recovery in IFR conditions.=0A>=0A>BOEING BUILD= LANCAIRS=0A>when Boeing built three 4P turbine aircraft for their own purp= oses; (likely a fast chase plane) they found the tail surfaces unsuitable f= or thepurpose. (remember the airplane was designed for 350 HP not 750HP) Bo= eing redesigned the tail feathers including using a thicker airfoil for the= horizontal surface.=0A>SO IN THE OPINION OF THE PROS AT BOEING, THE REAR S= URFACES WERE INADEQUATE FOR THE PURPOSE =0A>=0A>STALLS=0A>personally i beli= eve that every pilot of these Lancair(s) be required to see the stall of th= eir airplane. sit in the plane and let a pro do the job. maybe if you are b= rave, with the "test pilot" next to you try the recovery yourself. do it un= der the hood?? YOW. does your gyro tumble. YOW again.=0A>it is scary just t= o contemplate.=0A>at what altitude did you do your approach to stall traini= ng? 8,500 feet, 12.500 feet. there is a reason.=0A>=0A>personally, i would = be disinclined to ride in a 4 Turbine. i'm not smart enough. but if the inf= idels were at the edge of the airport shooting Rocket Propelled Grenadesat = me...then i would gladly take my chances in a Lancair 4 Turbine.=0A>=0A>the= airplane that comes to mind in comparison is the GeeBee; Jimmy=A0 Doolittl= e said it was the worst airplane he ever flew. AND, justabove the runway it= dropped a wing 90 degrees, pointing straight down. BUT, that wasn't bad en= ough,=A0 it did have one worse trait. as the pilot slowed down the nose kep= t rising andrequired forward stick; justthe opposite of any other airplane.= =0A>so there is an airplane made to go fast in 1931.=0A>=0A>peter=0A> ---67045276-974124906-1359307724=:53220 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
For all th= e LAIV builders (ES also ), I have a Mike Custard new, unused carbon double= strake available. Please contact me offline if interested.
Thanks.
 
<= a href=3D"mailto:Bill_burger@yahoo.com">Bill_burger@yahoo.com
408-892-8992
<= font size=3D"2" face=3D"Arial">
= From: David Weinsweig <weinsweigd@gmail.com>
To:= lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: 4P AUGERING IN
=

=0A
P= lease don't bash a plane in which you have never flown.  It just perpe= tuates bad stereotypes that the Lancair community does not need.  As t= he original owner of a propjet, it makes me very concerned every time a pro= pjet(or any Lancair) goes down.  However, I find my propjet to be a ve= ry honest airplane in that she does exactly what I tell her to do.  Ye= s, the margin for error is much less than most planes and it must be respec= ted. Sudden large power changes must be avoided, close attention to the bal= l especially at slow speeds is required, and IMHO it is imperative to stay = away from stall scenarios.

Having followed the Lan= cair community since 1999 and being a part of it since I bought kit LIV-501= in 2001, I am convinced that the overwhelming majority of accidents are pi= lot error-stall/spin, flying into thunderstorms or the occasional fuel deprivation-sometimes running out of fuel or the engine not getting the fu= el due to poor build or unporting of the engine.  The Lancair fuel sys= tem design in the propjet has received mixed reviews due to the belly tank = design.  The wings gravity feed the belly tank which then feeds the en= gine.  If one empties the wings and uses fuel from the belly tank, sto= ps to refuel then takes off before the wings have a chance to fill the bell= y tank, it is possible to unport the engine particularly with a high deck a= ngle on climb out.  I have heard the fuel running into my 34 gallon be= lly tank from the wings on the few occasions that I have used fuel from the= belly.  It can take a while to refill the belly while getting the air= out. This can also lead to a false sense of full fuel unless watched caref= ully.

I view these issues as lack of situational a= wareness whether on the ground or in the air and not innate problems with the plane as long as one understands their plane.  Perhaps this = relates to the higher crash rate among second owners as well as lower time = in a specific plane. As you point out the tail can be overpowered by the tu= rbine engine.  To help combat this, we installed Mike Custard's strake= s as well as his vertical fin extension thus increasing tail authority. &nb= sp;I suspect this helps the yaw issue to some degree. 

<= /div>
The stall scenarios that you describe scare me and should scare a= ny pilot but this situation can happen in any plane though admittedly more = likely in a IV series due to the tight envelope and small margin of error b= ut when we fly these planes we accept this risk and hopefully do everything= to minimize it and fly them the way they need to be flown.

<= /div>
There have been numerous aircraft that have gotten a bad reputati= on over the years due to pilots not flying them correctly.  The MU-2 and Robinson R22 helicopter(in which I have over 500 hours) in partic= ular come to mind.  Once proper training was mandated the accident rat= es went way down.  If you = choose not to fly in a IVPT, that is a personal choice but please do not equate bad(or poorly train= ed) pilots with a bad aircraft.  

The = IV series and particularly the Propjet is not a docile plane but when flown= within its envelope there is nothing as efficient and fun for the price in= a true personal traveling plane. 

David Weinsweig, MD
N750DW Propjet  285 hours

On Jan 26, 2013, at 2:07 AM,= peter williams <peterpaw@aol.com>= ; wrote:

HI THERE=0A
=0ATHE OSTRICH HAS ITS HEAD IN THE SAND
= =0Ait seems everyone is avoiding the issu= e here with this loss of airplane and pilot.
=0Athere is really only one clue at this point; a w= itness says that the plane was rotating when it came out the clouds and descended into the ground.
=0A
=0Ai dont pret= end to know what happened without the radar track, with the speed readouts.
=0A=
=0AA SCENARIO= THAT FITS THE DATA WE HAVE SO FAR
=0A= stalling a 4P is serious business.
=0A
=0AMAYBE DISOR= IENTATION; MAYBE AN AUTOPILOT MALFUNCTION; MAYBE UNEXPECTE= D ICING. MAYBE A TEMPORARY LOSS OF POWER = all of which could cause a stall.=
=0A=
=0Aimagine what it would= be like to be IFR and stall a Lancair 4/4P/turbine.  Not Fun. OK,
=0A
=0Aso here you a= re. nose pointing straight down. you look over at the airs= peed 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 b= ack on the wings...OH, by the way, did yo= ur Gyro(s) tumble. do you have the ability to cage the Gyro?? or is it self= righting. OH and how fa= st does that happen. and 100 knots is a s= illy low number and 200 knots is more likely within ten se= conds. STRAIGHT DOWN. What's that? 41 seconds to the ground OR 20,000 feet per minute straight down.
=0A(remember that the average 4P stalls and rotates 90-120 degrees and poin= ts straight down)
=0A=
=0ASO YOU THINK
=0Aah, 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 tor= que v. the 550 foot pound of torque of the piston engine. even at idle, the turbine is putti= ng considerable torque. My suspicion is a= TORQUE ROLL  and still in a stalled= mode.  YOW.  (sorta like a Sna= p Roll we have all seen at Oshkosh; a sna= p roll is an accelerated Stall. YES STALL)
=0A so you have twenty seconds at most to learn how to do stall reco= very in IFR conditions.
=0A
=0A= = = = = BOEING BUILD LANCAIRS=0Awhen 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 3= 50 HP not 750HP) Boeing = redesigned the tail feathers including using a thicker air= foil for the horizontal surface.
=0ASO IN THE OPINION OF THE PROS AT BOEING, THE REAR SURFACES WERE INADEQUATE FOR THE PURPOSE= <= /font>=
= =0A
=0ASTALLS
=0Apersonally i believe that every pil= ot of these Lancair(s) be required to see= the stall of their airplane. sit in the plane and let a pro do the job. ma= ybe if you are brave, with the "test pilot" next to you tr= y the recovery yourself. do it under the hood?? YOW. does your gyro tumble.= YOW again.
=0Ait is scary just to contemplate.
=0Aat what altitude did you do your approach to sta= ll training? 8,500 feet, 12.500 feet. the= re is a reason.
=0A
=0Apersonally, = i would be disinclined to ride in a 4 Tur= bine. i'm not smart enough. but if the infidels were at th= e edge of the airport shooting Rocket Pro= pelled Grenades at me...then i would gladly take my chance= s in a Lancair 4 Turbine.
=0A
=0Athe airplane that c= omes 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, p= ointing straight down. BUT, that wasn't bad enough, <= /font> 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.
=0A= so there is an airplane made to go fast in 1931.
=0A
=0Apeter
=0A<= /font>=0A<= /font>


---67045276-974124906-1359307724=:53220--