X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:58:48 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imr-db02.mx.aol.com ([205.188.91.96] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.2) with ESMTP id 4131406 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:48:35 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.91.96; envelope-from=Sky2high@aol.com Received: from imo-ma03.mx.aol.com (imo-ma03.mx.aol.com [64.12.78.138]) by imr-db02.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o1JNltb8021557 for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:47:55 -0500 Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-ma03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.9.) id q.cdd.68bbe593 (37553) for ; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:47:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from magic-d16.mail.aol.com (magic-d16.mail.aol.com [172.19.155.132]) by cia-mb03.mx.aol.com (v127.7) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMB032-92b14b7f23271ce; Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:47:51 -0500 From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <15ef7.2db37ce1.38b07d27@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:47:51 EST Subject: Re: [LML] FW: [LML] N41LA 1st Flight 2nd Report X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_15ef7.2db37ce1.38b07d27_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 9.5 sub 155 X-AOL-ORIG-IP: 67.175.242.202 X-AOL-IP: 172.19.155.132 X-Spam-Flag:NO X-AOL-SENDER: Sky2high@aol.com --part1_15ef7.2db37ce1.38b07d27_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Larry, See interspersed remarks below. Looking forward to more adjustment info. Grayhawk In a message dated 2/19/2010 12:18:13 P.M. Central Standard Time, LHenney@charter.net writes: Grayhawk, Always the deep thinker. You are correct to note the roll error. However, after working with several 320/ 360 series roll errors I contend to have a better fix. The flap lowering drag thing is too inefficient, ugly, and fails to address the root problem (imho). I believe wings are to make lift. By contrast, flap lift in cruise flight adds only to unwanted twisting moments.... The flap is part of the wing as designed until it goes lower than being taken out of reflex - then it is a flap. There was one thing (only one?) I did not check carefully whilst building - the lateral relationship betwixt the outboard trailing edge (corner) of each fuselage fairing to flap since I was depending on the moldings. If I remember correctly (and post build), the left one was 1/2" higher than the right when the aircraft was leveled laterally. Since the flap and aileron were built so that their trailing edge was on a straight line from that fairing to the wingtip TE when the wing was positioned on its jig, it is possible that left wing heavy occurred because the faired flap is too high on the left wing (or a little twist is built in). Thus, frequently the level flight position is achieved by adjusting the flaps (left down a bit, right up a bit) and cosmetically fixing the mismatch at the fuselage with bondo (uh, micro). However, note that if one is flying solo (assuming internal components have been placed so that the empty weight is almost evenly split between the mains), the left wing needs slightly more lift. For a reasonably weighted pilot and almost full wing tanks (standard design), 4 gallons more in the right wing than the left pretty much balances the aircraft around the centerline. Of course, equal wing fuel and a similarly weighted right seat occupant accomplishes the same. It is up to the builder on whether to bias the wing lift for solo or dual flight - anyway, that is easily handled by aileron trim. The flap adjustment is so minor as to not affect overall flight characteristics other than remove the "heavy" wing component. Think of it as less reflexed unlift. We removed the trailing spar attach strap. Then we offset the two outboard holes on a new strap by 90 thousandths. After flying flight two today, the ailerons sit perfectly flat with no roll component. There was no adjustment to the flaps. They look good on the ramp (especially when you look at them simultaneously!). Clever! Now the real ponderance. Should I make both left and right new trailing edge straps with 45 thousandths correction on each side? This of course would minimize that finger nail thickness of body work error..... Regarding flap reflex...... This is a vintage 1987 glacially slow build 320. I remember a long time ago that you almost convinced me that my FB 360 circa 1996 had the fillets set to the 7 deg reflex. "almost" because my manual still said to set them 5/8" high (or so). I thought you were working the FB aspect. Are you saying ALL 320/ 360 vintage fillets are molded correct to 7 deg reflex? So only the 235s were to be reflexed? Could Lancair maybe mention this manual / blue print error in a SB? It is 7 degrees. The 235 fillets matched the unreflexed wing design and the recommendation was to raise the flaps to -7 degrees when over certain speeds (140 or 160 KIAS, I forget) because of the severe wing twist if left in the 235 "faired" position. I am sure you feel the terrific pitching moment when the flaps are moved. The 320 slow build fillets were molded to the cruise position. My instructions did not contain anything about adjusting them above the faired in position. I know you tested performance by trying to reduce drag from lift at high speed by raising the flaps higher than normal and you reported that no improvement resulted (of course this was information passed to other competing racers and may have been, uh, adjusted for their consumption). I tried the same and also found no improvement and I am still willing to take on any NA 320 side-by-side regardless of their flap position. It is true that if the flaps are adjusted to the fillet at 0 KIAS, they will fly higher at >0 KIAS - easily checked by hand lifting them and noting that they will be above the fillet. Maybe the instructions you saw were to correct for badly molded fillets. But alas Mark and I both concur that about 3 degrees vs. 7 is indeed faster. Anyway, yes they are reflexed and surely they are supposed to be back in 1987, no? Convince me. Hmmmm, Are you saying that at rest they are another 3 degrees above the fillet? At high speed cruise, say 180 KIAS or so, with the extra reflex, what is the position of the elevator horns? Is it difficult to trim nose down? What is the horizontal stab angle of incidence? BTW, the VEP up pressure switch lasted 2.2 hours. Not bad from what I hear. Lucky to have a spare new style switch in my parts bin. More data collection tomorrow. Larry ____________________________________ From: Sky2high@aol.com [mailto:Sky2high@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 6:50 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [LML] N41LA 1st Flight Rick, Congrats! Uh, the 320 slow build kit contained at least 121,432 parts, not to mention all the extra hardware obtained from Ace and various race shops. It also consumed 19,123 sheets of sandpaper. Comments: The flaps are flying too high in pic # 1 and 2. In all pix, the left aileron is below the wing tip fairing usually indicating a heavy left wing (very common). Re-rigging the flaps can help with the heavy wing condition. Grayhawk In a message dated 2/17/2010 1:39:41 P.M. Central Standard Time, LHenney@charter.net writes: Lancair Friends, Put your hands together for Rick Cathriner's most excellent 1st Flight. N41LA Certification occurred earlier today with a very complimentary "no squawks" report from his DAR Dave Eby. N41LA took to the sky's today after a 22 year gestation. Lady's and Gentleman I suspect we have a record. Airborne initial testing shows again, no gripes, fast and true. Builds Slow, Flies Fast! Does anyone remember how many pieces came in the original 320 slow build kit?!!! Still wishing someone would step up with a Riechal Trim system. Anyone, anyone? Bueller? I think we'll reverse engineer one from a local 320 flyer...... Congratulations Rick on a Job Well Done! To you builders out there, never give up! To the flyers, meet Rick for lunch sometime. He's earned at least one free trip to the Hard Eights BBQ in Stephenville (SEP). Way to Go Rick! Larry Henney -- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html --part1_15ef7.2db37ce1.38b07d27_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Larry,
 
See interspersed remarks below.  Looking forward to more adjustm= ent=20 info.
 
Grayhawk
 
In a message dated 2/19/2010 12:18:13 P.M. Central Standard Time,=20 LHenney@charter.net writes:
Grayhawk,
&nbs= p;
Always the= deep=20 thinker. You are correct to note the roll error.  However, after wo= rking=20 with several 320/ 360 series roll errors I contend to have a better fix.=  =20 The flap lowering drag thing is too inefficient, ugly,  and fails= to=20 address the root problem (imho). I believe wings are to make lift. By=20 contrast, flap lift in cruise flight adds only to unwanted twisting= =20 moments....
The flap is part of the wing as designed until it goes lower tha= n=20 being taken out of reflex - then it is a flap.  There was one thing= (only=20 one?) I did not check carefully whilst building - the lateral relationship= =20 betwixt the outboard trailing edge (corner) of each fuselage fai= ring=20 to flap since I was depending on the moldings.  If I remember correct= ly=20 (and post build), the left one was 1/2" higher than the right wh= en the=20 aircraft was leveled laterally. Since the flap and aileron were= built=20 so that their trailing edge was on a straight line from that fairing to th= e=20 wingtip TE when the wing was positioned on its jig, it is possible that le= ft=20 wing heavy occurred because the faired flap is too high on the left= wing=20 (or a little twist is built in).  Thus, frequently the level fli= ght=20 position is achieved by adjusting the flaps (left down a bit, right= up a=20 bit) and cosmetically fixing the mismatch at the=20 fuselage with bondo (uh, micro).  However, note that if one= is=20 flying solo (assuming internal components have been placed so that the emp= ty=20 weight is almost evenly split between the mains), the left wing needs slig= htly=20 more lift.  For a reasonably weighted pilot and almost full wing tank= s=20 (standard design), 4 gallons more in the right wing than the=20 left pretty much balances the aircraft around the centerline. = Of=20 course, equal wing fuel and a similarly weighted right seat=20 occupant accomplishes the same.  It is up to the builder on whet= her to=20 bias the wing lift for solo or dual flight - anyway, that is easily handle= d by=20 aileron trim.  The flap adjustment is so minor as to not affect overa= ll=20 flight characteristics other than remove the "heavy" wing component. = Think=20 of it as less reflexed unlift.
 
We removed= the trailing=20 spar attach strap.  Then we offset the two outboard holes on a new= strap=20 by 90 thousandths.  After flying flight two today, the ailerons sit= =20 perfectly flat with no roll component.  There was no adjustment to= the=20 flaps. They look good on the ramp (especially when you look at them=20 simultaneously!).
Clever!
 
&nbs= p;
Now the rea= l=20 ponderance.  Should I make both left and right new trailing edge st= raps=20 with 45 thousandths correction on each side?  This of course=20 would minimize that finger nail thickness of body work=20 error.....
&nbs= p;
Regarding= flap=20 reflex......  This is a vintage 1987 glacially slow build 320. = ; I=20 remember a long time ago that you almost convinced me that my FB 360 cir= ca=20 1996 had the fillets set to the 7 deg reflex.  "almost"= because=20 my manual still said to set them 5/8" high (or so).  I thought you= were=20 working the FB aspect.  Are you saying  ALL  320/ 360 vintage fillets are=20 molded correct to 7 deg reflex?  So only the 235s were to be=20 reflexed?  Could Lancair maybe mention this manual / blue print err= or in=20 a SB? 
It is 7 degrees.  The 235 fillets matched the unreflexed wing=20 design and the recommendation was to raise the flaps to -7 degrees wh= en=20 over certain speeds (140 or 160 KIAS, I forget) because of the severe wing= twist=20 if left in the 235 "faired" position.  I am sure you feel the te= rrific=20 pitching moment when the flaps are moved.  The 320 slow build fillets= were=20 molded to the cruise position.  My instructions did not contain anyth= ing=20 about adjusting them above the faired in position.  I know you tested= =20 performance by trying to reduce drag from lift at high speed by raising th= e=20 flaps higher than normal and you reported that no improvement resulted (of= =20 course this was information passed to other competing racers and may have= been,=20 uh, adjusted for their consumption).  I tried the same and also found= no=20 improvement and I am still willing to take on any NA 320 side-by-side rega= rdless=20 of their flap position. It is true that if the flaps are adjusted to the= fillet=20 at 0 KIAS, they will fly higher at >0 KIAS - easily checked by=20 hand lifting them and noting that they will be above the fillet. = ;=20 Maybe the instructions you saw were to correct for badly molded=20 fillets. 
 
&nbs= p;
BTW, the VE= P  up  pressure= switch lasted 2.2=20 hours.  Not bad from what I hear. Lucky to have a spare new style= switch=20 in my parts bin.  More data collection tomorrow.
&nbs= p;
Larry

From: Sky2high@aol.com [mailto:Sky2high@aol.c= om]=20
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 6:50 PM
To:=20 lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: Re: [LML] N41LA 1st=20 Flight

Rick,
 
Congrats!
 
Uh, the 320 slow build kit contained at least 121,432 parts, not to= =20 mention all the extra hardware obtained from Ace and various race shops.=  =20 It also consumed 19,123 sheets of sandpaper.
 
Comments:
The flaps are flying too high in pic # 1 and 2.
In all pix, the left aileron is below the wing tip fairing usually= =20 indicating a heavy left wing (very common).  Re-rigging the flaps= can=20 help with the heavy wing condition.
 
Grayhawk
 
In a message dated 2/17/2010 1:39:41 P.M. Central Standard Time,=20 LHenney@charter.net writes:
Lancair=20 Friends,
<= /SPAN> 
Put your hand= s together=20 for Rick Cathriner's most excellent 1st Flight. N41LA Certification oc= curred=20 earlier today with a very complimentary "no squawks" report from his= DAR=20 Dave Eby.
<= /SPAN> 
N41LA took to= the sky's=20 today after a 22 year gestation.  Lady's and Gentleman I sus= pect=20 we have a record.  Airborne initial testing shows again, no gripe= s,=20 fast and true.  Builds Slow, Flies Fast! Does anyone remember how= many=20 pieces came in the original 320 slow build kit?!!!
<= /SPAN> 
Still wishing= someone=20 would step up with a Riechal Trim system.  Anyone, anyone?= =20 Bueller?  I think we'll reverse engineer one from a local 32= 0=20 flyer......
<= /SPAN> 
Congratulatio= ns Rick on=20 a Job Well Done!  To you builders out there, never give up! = To=20 the flyers, meet Rick for lunch sometime.  He's earned at least= one=20 free trip to the Hard Eights BBQ in Stephenville=20 (SEP).
<= /SPAN> 
Way to Go=20 Rick!
<= /SPAN> 
Larry=20 Henney
<= /SPAN> 
<= /SPAN> 
<= /SPAN> 
<= /SPAN> 
<= /SPAN> 
<= /SPAN> 
<= /SPAN> 


--
For archives and unsub=20 http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
 --part1_15ef7.2db37ce1.38b07d27_boundary--