X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 07:57:45 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imr-ma02.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.40] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTP id 6034483 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 06:26:43 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.206.40; envelope-from=peterpaw@aol.com Received: from mtaomg-ma05.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-ma05.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.41.12]) by imr-ma02.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 4FEC21C0000BC; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 06:26:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from core-mma004b.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-mma004.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.191.141]) by mtaomg-ma05.r1000.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id 13F0DE000085; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 06:26:09 -0500 (EST) References: <9B681961-4C8E-4400-A6E5-9EEAAC9B03BA@gmail.com> X-Original-To: greg456pw@gmail.com, lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Archived Message #63898 In-Reply-To: <9B681961-4C8E-4400-A6E5-9EEAAC9B03BA@gmail.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: peter williams X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CFCC2A9162B310_1708_C403A_webmail-m001.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 37309-STANDARD Received: from 69.204.230.119 by webmail-m001.sysops.aol.com (64.12.101.83) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 29 Jan 2013 06:26:08 -0500 X-Original-Message-Id: <8CFCC2A913C9D10-1708-3A4CE@webmail-m001.sysops.aol.com> X-Originating-IP: [69.204.230.119] X-Original-Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 06:26:08 -0500 (EST) x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 1:2:462380128:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 4 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d290c5107b1d11b49 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----------MB_8CFCC2A9162B310_1708_C403A_webmail-m001.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Greg, i have seen one of the 4P conversions and have met the owner. the airplane = is located at Spruce Creek and the owner's name is Ron. he sometime contrib= utes to this forum. He says, with a grin, it is a different airplane. A 4P Turbine was converted, but i have not seen that airplane; i was told = that airplane was previously equipped with winglets and the Tip/Cuff conver= sion by Fibercraft was five Knots faster after the conversion. i cannot att= est to than speed increase differential. But, more importantly, The achieve= ment was maximum roll off after stall of 30 degrees.=20 i would want to see the testing numbers including temperature, humidity an= d altitude of the testing; but even if the numbers were the reverse and fiv= e knots slower, it would not discourage me in the least. i am very happy with my 4P; i had vortex generators installed on my airplane and i cannot attest to lo= ss of top speed, if any, as we did not test that. but i had, Test Pilot, Le= n Fox do the before and after testing on my airplane with the VG's. the sta= ll on my airplane was reduced by 7-8 knots with a detailed test pilot repor= t. the VG's are at 10% of cord. we then tried moving some of the VGs to 8% = of cord in the area of the aerolons. Len tested that configuration and sadl= y it did not improve the post stall characteristics. i was hoping to dodge = the bullet of the post stall gyrations. I asked Len about stall strips and = he said that he had tested stall strips for others on Lancairs, (like you w= ould see on a Beech Bonanza) and it did not tame the Lancair 4/4P stall.=20 Thus, if i want docile stall characteristics, i will have to go with the on= ly proved conversion i know of, which is done by Fibercraft in Spruce Creek= , Florida. Matt Collier is the head of Fibercraft and he is incredibly know= ledgeable about Lancair 4/4P/Turbine aircraft. he has build ten in his own = shop and has serviced many more than that as well. But the credential that = impresses me is that he was there at Lancair when they were converting the = Lancair 4 into the Columbia 300 etc. He was there to build prototypes #2 an= d #3. ( i only learned of Matt's experience at Lancair long after i engaged= them to work on my airplane.) http://www.fibercraft.us so far i have had two of their products installed on my airplane. the first= item is small but i consider important. The Lancair kit comes with nylon c= levis for the trim actuators, they tend to wear. Fibercraft builds a metal = replacement. the second item was more interesting, a Carbon Fiber rudder.=20 the "fast build" rudder weigh 42-44 pounds. an early home build will run ar= ound 29 pounds. my new rudder weighs about 19 pounds. now, for me it was im= portant to move the CG forward as i am likely on a number of occasions have= four people in my airplane. because i had a 29 pound rudder, it only moved= the CG forward about 5/8" to 3/4." but i am tickled pink with the new rudd= er. note, on a recent trip from TEB to KEYW, i had four adults, 60 lbs of lugga= ge and was well within CG. The airplane handled excellently. (as a minor note, we seemed to be about 10 knots slower at 17,500 feet, th= an when i was 460 pounds lighter with only two persons) (250 kts v. 260kts = at 18 gph) I have encouraged Matt to redo his web site as it does not do justice to th= e improvements in "docile performance" that his cuff/wing tip achieves. Th= e web page is like Matt, very conservative in tooting its own horn. a recent incident As to crashing on the way home, as near as i can tell it is pilots who have= not had training in the Lancair airplanes. the attitude is "hey, i have al= l these hours, i have flown everything" "i don't need no training" At one time Bonanza were know as "Doctor Killers" and later it was likely t= o be Beech Barons and then, tearing the tails off of Piper Malibu's . The d= octors, ( had the money and the means. they were going from Cessna 172's to= the Bonanza's.=20 I looked at a 4P in Florida which had a Gator picture on the whole side of = the airplane. The owner told me that a Cessna 210 pilot had come in from Ca= lifornia to buy the airplane. on short final this buyer chopped all the pow= er and nearly killed himself and the owner before the owner could get the p= ower back on. HE SAID IT WAS UGLY. The 210 pilot went away without buying,= but alive. personally i have great respect for the 4P, right now my personal limits are IFR, 400-= 500 foot ceiling and limited night flying. Last week, i did my first "go-a= round" in many years at night at TEB. they had asked me to keep my speed up= , which was about 200 knots and i couldn't get slowed enough to be comforta= ble, even with gear, flaps and speed brakes out. The speed envelop is much = greater that the twin Cessna time that is the bulk of my 3,700 hours. i wou= ld have no trepidation, tomorrow, to shoot to 100 sky obscured, 1/2 mile vi= s. in my Cessna 340A. We are old friends. Even though the 4P is flown with= similar pattern speeds, "day ain't da same." peter=20 =20 =20 -----Original Message----- From: Greg To: peterpaw Sent: Tue, Jan 29, 2013 12:00 am Subject: Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Archived Message #63898 Hello Peter, Do you have any information about the modifications done to the three proto= types and where these changes made for the lVP or turbine lVP? I am intere= sted in the piston improvements. =20 Is there a common theme with the 11% of new owners crashing on the way hom= e? Greg Milnar From: peter williams Sender: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: 4P AUGERING IN Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 06:59:24 -0500 To: lml@lancaironline.net hi there there is such a product with two or three flying; the promise seems to be a= rolling motion limited to 30 degrees. the ones flying seem to conform to t= hat standard. it was developed by someone who worked at Lancair when they converted the L= ancair 4 into a certified airplane with docile stall characteristics. he bu= ild prototypes #2 and #3 while at Lancair. this is a conversion that you don't need it until you really need it. Ask R= on from Spruce Creek; his airplane is such modified. i am appalled by the record of Lancair aircraft. 11% of purchasers of Lanca= irs crash on the way home. THAT IS ONE OUT OF NINE. (they did not have Lancair specific training) easy to understand why there are only two companies in the Lancair insuran= ce market and i pay $9,000 a year for $200,000 of hull insurance with a $20= ,000 deductible. and, i have 3,700 hours with 2,700 hours of twin Cessna ti= me. i wish that the FAA would impose something like they did to the MU2 pilots;= it would keep us all safer. peter -----Original Message----- From: Terrence O'Neill To: lml Sent: Sat, Jan 26, 2013 2:25 pm Subject: [LML] Re: 4P AUGERING IN Just a suggestion to theLNC4 guys: why don;t you dudes get together and fi= nance a wind tunnel survey of the pitching and yawing moments through the A= OA 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 spee= d 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 ICIN= G. 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,=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 kn= ots 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 min= ute 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 th= e 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 consi= derable 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 IF= R conditions. 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 purpos= e. (remember the airplane was designed for 350 HP not 750HP) Boeing redesig= ned 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 STALLS personally i believe that every pilot of these Lancair(s) be required to se= e the stall of their airplane. sit in the plane and let a pro do the job. m= aybe if you are brave, with the "test pilot" next to you try the recovery y= ourself. 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 en= ough. but if the infidels were at the edge of the airport shooting Rocket P= ropelled 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 Doolitt= le 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 kep= t rising and required forward stick; just the opposite of any other airplan= e. so there is an airplane made to go fast in 1931. peter =20 ----------MB_8CFCC2A9162B310_1708_C403A_webmail-m001.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Greg,

i have seen one of the 4P conversions and= have met the owner. the airplane is located at Spruce Creek and the owner'= s name is Ron. he sometime contributes to= this forum. He says, with a grin,  it is a different airplane.

 A 4P Turbine was converted, but i have not seen that airplane; i was told that airplane was previously equipped with winglets and the Tip/Cuff conversion by Fibercraft = was five Knots faster after the conversio= n. i cannot attest to than speed increase differential. But, more importantly, The achievement was maximum roll off after stall of 30 degrees.

 i would want to see the testing num= bers including temperature, humidity and altitude of the testing; but even if the numbers were the reverse and five= knots slower, it would not discourage me= in the least.

i am very happy with my 4P;
 i had vortex generators installed on my airplane and= i cannot attest to loss of top speed, if any, as we did n= ot test that. but i had, Test Pilot, Len Fox do the before= and after testing on my airplane with the VG's. the stall= on my airplane was reduced by 7-8 knots = with a detailed test pilot report. the VG's are at 10% of cord. we then tried moving some= of the VGs to 8% of cord in the area of = the aerolons. Len tested that configuration and sadly it = did not improve the post stall characteri= stics. i was hoping to dodge the bullet of the post stall gyrations. I asked Len abou= t stall strips and he said that he had tested stall strips for others on La= ncairs, (like you would see on a Beech Bonanza) and it did not tame the Lancair 4/4P stall.

Thus, if i want docile stall characteristics, i will have to go with the only proved conversion i know of, which i= s done by Fibercraft in Spruce Creek, Florida. Matt Collier is the head of Fibercraft and he is inc= redibly knowledgeable about Lancair 4/4P/Turbine aircraft. he has build ten= in his own shop and has serviced many mo= re than that as well. But the credential that impresses me= is that he was there at Lancair when they were converting the Lancair 4 in= to the Columbia 300 etc. He was there to build prototypes #2 and #3. ( i only learned of Matt's experience at Lancair long after i engaged t= hem to work on my airplane.)

http://www.fibercraft.us
so far i have= had two of their products installed on my airplane. the first item is small but i consider import<= font size=3D"2">ant. The Lancair kit come= s with nylon clevis for the trim actuators, they tend to wear. Fibercraft builds a metal replacement.
the second item was more interesting, a C= arbon Fiber rudder.
the "fast build" rudder weigh 42-44 pounds. an early home build will run around 29 pounds. my new r= udder weighs about 19 pounds. now, for me= it was important to move the CG forward as i am likely on a numb= er of occasions have four people in my airplane. because i= had a 29 pound rudder, it only moved the CG forward about= 5/8" to 3/4." but i am tickled pink with the new rudder.
note, on a recent trip from TEB to KEYW, = i had four adults, 60 lbs of luggage and was well within C= G. The airplane handled excellently.
 (as a minor note, we seemed to be about 10 knots slo= wer at 17,500 feet, than when i was 460 pounds lighter with only two person= s) (250 kts v. 260kts at 18 gph)

I have encouraged Matt to redo his web si= te as it does not do justice to the improvements in "docil= e performance" that  his cuff/wing t= ip achieves. The web page is like Matt, very conservative in tooting= its own horn.
<= /font><= font size=3D"2">= = <= /font>
 a recent incident<= /font>
As to crashing on the way home, as near as i can tell it is pilots who have= not had training in the Lancair airplane= s. the attitude is "hey, i have all thes<= font size=3D"2">e hours, i have flown everything" "i don't= need no training"

At one time Bonanza were k= now as "Doctor Killers" and later it was likely to be Beech Barons and then= , tearing the tails off of Piper Malibu's . The doctors, ( had the money and the means. they were goin= g from Cessna 172's to the Bonanza's.

I looked at a 4P in Flor= ida which had a Gator picture on the whol= e side of the airplane. The owner told me that a Cessna 21= 0 pilot had come in from California to bu= y the airplane. on short final this buyer chopped all the power and nearly killed = himself and the owner before the owner could get the power back on.  H= E SAID IT WAS UGLY. The 210 pilot went away without= buying, but alive.

personally
i have great respect for the 4= P, right now my personal limits are IFR, = 400-500 foot ceiling and limited night flying. Last week,  i did my = first "go-around" in many years at night at TEB. they had asked me to keep my speed up, which was about 200 knots and i couldn't get slowed enough = to be comfortable, even with gear, flaps and speed brakes out. The speed envelop is much greater that the twin Cessna time = that is the bulk of my 3,700 hours. i would have no trepidation, tomorrow, to shoo= t to 100 sky obscured, 1/2 mile vis.  in my Cessna 340A. We are old friends. = Even though the 4P is flown with similar pattern speeds, "= day ain't da same."

peter= = =
<= /font>


-----= Original Message-----
From: Greg <greg456pw@gmail.com>
To: peterpaw <peterpaw@aol.com>
Sent: Tue, Jan 29, 2013 12:00 am
Subject: Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Archived Message #63898


Hello Peter,

Do you have any information= about the modifications done to the three prototypes and where these chang= es made for the lVP or turbine lVP?  I am interested in the piston imp= rovements.  
 Is there a common the= me with the 11% of new owners crashing on the way home?

Greg Milnar


=
=
From:peter williams <peterpaw@aol.com>
Sender:= <marv@lancaironline.net>= ;
Subject:Re: [LML] Re: 4P AUGERING IN
Date:<= /span>Sun, 27 Jan 2013 06:59:24 -0500
= To:lml@lancaironline.net
3D"Message

hi t= here
there is such a product with two or three flying; the promise seems to be a= rolling motion limited to 30 degrees. the ones flying seem to conform to t= hat standard.

it was developed by someone who worked at Lancair when they converted the L= ancair 4 into a certified airplane with docile stall characteristics. he bu= ild prototypes #2 and #3 while at Lancair.

this is a conversion that you don't need it until you really need it. Ask R= on from Spruce Creek; his airplane is such modified.

i am appalled by the record of Lancair aircraft. 11% of purchasers of Lanca= irs crash on the way home.
THAT IS ONE OUT OF NINE.
(they did not have Lancair specific training)

 easy to understand why there are only two companies in the Lancair in= surance market and i pay $9,000 a year for $200,000 of hull insurance with = a $20,000 deductible. and, i have 3,700 hours with 2,700 hours of twin Cess= na time.

i wish that the FAA would impose something like they did to the MU2 pilots;= it would keep us all safer.

peter



---= --Original Message-----
From: Terrence O'Neill <troneill= @charter.net>
To: lml <lml@lancaironline.net<= /a>>
Sent: Sat, Jan 26, 2013 2:25 pm
Subject: [LML] Re: 4P AUGERING IN
Just a suggestion t= o theLNC4 guys:  why don;t you dudes get together and finance a wind t= unnel survey of the pitching and yawing moments through the AOA range? &nbs= p;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, wit= h 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 ICIN= G. MAYBE A TEMPORARY LOSS OF POWER all of which could cause a sta= ll.

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

so here you are. nose pointing straight down. you look over at&nb= sp;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 ba= ck 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 doe= s that happen. and 100 knots is a silly low number and 200 knots is mo= re likely within ten seconds. STRAIGHT DOWN. What's that? 41 seconds t= o 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 th= e 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 stil= l in a stalled mode.  YOW.  (sorta like a Snap Roll we have&= nbsp;all seen at Oshkosh; a snap roll is an accelerated Stall. YES STA= LL)
 so you have twenty seconds at most to learn how to do stall reco= very in IFR conditions.

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 p= urpose. (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 I= NADEQUATE FOR THE PURPOSE 

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 j= ob. 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 a= gain.
it is scary just to contemplate.
at what altitude did you do your approach to stall training? 8,500 fee= t, 12.500 feet. there is a reason.

personally, i would be disinclined to ride in a 4 Turbine. i'm not sma= rt enough. but if the infidels were at the edge of the airport shooting&nbs= p;Rocket Propelled Grenades at me...then i would gladly take my chance= s in a Lancair 4 Turbine.

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

peter
= =
<= /font>=
----------MB_8CFCC2A9162B310_1708_C403A_webmail-m001.sysops.aol.com--