Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 18:11:59 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-d06.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.38] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b8) with ESMTP id 1796344 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 02 Oct 2002 17:39:54 -0400 Received: from VTAILJEFF@aol.com by imo-d06.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v34.13.) id q.fc.1ec247e1 (25305) for ; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 17:39:48 -0400 (EDT) From: VTAILJEFF@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 17:39:48 EDT Subject: Re: [LML] L-IV-P elevator sensitivity X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_fc.1ec247e1.2accc1a4_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10636 --part1_fc.1ec247e1.2accc1a4_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 09/30/2002 8:05:49 PM Central Daylight Time, tednoel@cfl.rr.com writes: > Having flown the factory demonstrator, it is my feeling that the L-IV-P is > more sensitive in pitch than would be desirable for good control harmony. > Certainly those with more flight experience (Brent Regan, are you > listening?) can comment on this issue. Feels OK to me. Handles very much like a Bonanza-- but if you want one that flies like a Cessna172-- Jeff Edwards CFI(I), DPE --part1_fc.1ec247e1.2accc1a4_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 09/30/2002 8:05:49 PM Central Daylight Time, tednoel@cfl.rr.com writes:


Having flown the factory demonstrator, it is my feeling that the L-IV-P is
more sensitive in pitch than would be desirable for good control harmony.
Certainly those with more flight experience (Brent Regan, are you
listening?) can comment on this issue.



Feels OK to me. Handles very much like a Bonanza-- but if you want one that flies like a Cessna172--

Jeff Edwards
CFI(I),  DPE
 --part1_fc.1ec247e1.2accc1a4_boundary--