X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 07:31:01 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail-qy0-f177.google.com ([209.85.221.177] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.7) with ESMTP id 4328951 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 28 May 2010 00:29:05 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.221.177; envelope-from=vonjet@gmail.com Received: by qyk7 with SMTP id 7so1221092qyk.7 for ; Thu, 27 May 2010 21:28:30 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=RmRxWIbB+zpCuTo0soNrO0ZU2dO+/UonfGXRKGOsmLI90hlOcBHAUX5OOclolqEK45 GEGf+fyhYttHz78JIWGhMg/6Yxy1h8o4PmkN+5WCRQGD20oqIM5B2mBiWuzt8lJT+l1r Axr74XjM2csir5jWqtTRFZfpapMD81e976W30= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.213.199 with SMTP id gx7mr2523549qcb.187.1275020910515; Thu, 27 May 2010 21:28:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.249.213 with HTTP; Thu, 27 May 2010 21:28:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: X-Original-Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 21:28:30 -0700 X-Original-Message-ID: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: 320/360 tail mod From: Bryan Wullner X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016361e837673d4fc04879ff00b --0016361e837673d4fc04879ff00b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 If you add a MKII tail your probably gonna want/need to add the Long engine mount and cowlings as well. I wouldn't do it if I was you. I love the MKII tail and the longer nose but I would never redo it if I had the small tail. On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Matt Reeves wrote: > Mike Campbell from Arizona did cut his short tail off of his flying > Dreamcatcher 360 back in the day. > > He did retro to the bigger tail. I remember a picture of him cutting off > the tail with a large saw which made me cringe. In the end, I believe he > said it was a ton of work and was not worth it and had to do again, he would > not have done it. > > Mike was an incredible builder and was featured on the cover of many > magazines and even had his Dreamcatcher displayed at the New York Museum of > Modern Art as a really neat hanging display. He had his own clothing and > even a great video of his building process and some awesome aerobatic flying > in the 360. Later he built a Giles aerobatic plane and it had an incredible > paint scheme of an alien breaking out of the inside of the plane. > > Remember too you will have to repaint and getting the paint to match up is > hard. > > My vote is don't do it. I have flown in both small and large MKII tail > 320's and vote not a significant difference. I fly with power right down to > the runway which provides just enough air over the tail to give me plenty of > control with no pitch problems. > > That Dreamcatcher was an amazing plane if any of you remember it. It had > the picture of the Aztec Goddess underneath it and was just an incredible > airplane. I am sure Mike is sad he sold it and it was later destroyed in an > accident that was not the fault of the airplane. > > I think that was late 80's early 90's that all happened. MIke was a great, > energetic builder and Lancair promoter. I heard he wanted to design his own > airplane but is so busy now running his own company. > > Matt > > > --- On *Wed, 5/26/10, Larry Henney * wrote: > > > From: Larry Henney > Subject: [LML] 320/360 tail mod > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Date: Wednesday, May 26, 2010, 11:41 AM > > Danny, > > I've flown a lot in both big and small tails and hardly notice a difference > anymore, but I do prefer the large tail. One practical consideration I've > seen with students in the small tail is the need for a little more precise > airspeed control on final. If one is 10 kts fast in the large tail it seems > less sensitive in the flare than the same error in the small tail. This > should not matter however, I'm only suggesting flying a precise 1.3 Vso on > final. When airspeed is properly scanned the small tail flares and lands > nicely. I've seen a lot of PIO while waiting for the airspeed to arrive at > 1.3Vso or less in the flare. It's highly self critiquing and highly > entertaining for the instructor. > > Retrofit? Hmmm. I've not known of a single small tail driver who actually > did it after flying. I'd guess it would not be too much pain to do for an > experienced builder. Does Lancair still stock/ sell retrofit tails? If > they sell the carbon MK II tail in a fast build version I expect it could be > done in less than a month but it would be a huge undertaking for a novice > builder (imho). > > Good Luck with your decision. > > Larry Henney > N360LH (big tail) > 930 hrs > > ------------------------------ > *From:* LenS790501@aol.com [mailto:LenS790501@aol.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 25, 2010 3:13 PM > *To:* lml@lancaironline.net > *Subject:* Re: [LML] 320/360 tail mod > > Danny, > There are many small tail 320/360s out there flying, including mine with > over 700 hours, and they are not squirrely at all. Mine is extremely stable > in slow flight and there is no PIO during landing. Have you flown the plane > you're considering? That would be my first suggestion so you can see for > yourself. > Len Spina > N15EG > > In a message dated 5/25/2010 9:28:07 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time, > dannymiller@wowway.com writes: > > Hi folks, I'm new here and I have no doubts this has been discussed at > length in the past. I'm considering the purchase of a 320 with the > original > tail and from everything I've read it seems to be a squirrely a/c subject > to > PIO in the landing configuration. Can you direct me to additional > resources > that describe the time/effort/expense, etc. involved in retrofitting the > tail section? > > Thanks, > Danny > > > -- > For archives and unsub > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html > > > --0016361e837673d4fc04879ff00b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If you add a MKII tail your probably gonna want/need to add the Long engine= mount and cowlings as well. I wouldn't do it if I was you. =A0I love t= he MKII tail and the longer nose but I would never redo it if I had the sma= ll tail.



On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 1= 1:55 AM, Matt Reeves <mattreeves@yahoo.com> wrote:


--0016361e837673d4fc04879ff00b--
Mike Campbell from Arizona did cut his sh= ort tail off of his flying Dreamcatcher 360 back in the day.=A0

He = did retro to the bigger tail.=A0 I remember a picture of him cutting off th= e tail with a large saw which made me cringe.=A0 In the end, I believe he s= aid it was a ton of work and was not worth it and had to do again, he would= not have done it.=A0

Mike was an incredible builder and was featured on the cover of many ma= gazines and even had his Dreamcatcher displayed at the New York Museum of M= odern Art as a really neat hanging display.=A0 He had his own clothing and = even a great video of his building process and some awesome aerobatic flyin= g in the 360.=A0 Later he built a Giles aerobatic plane and it had an incre= dible paint scheme of an alien breaking out of the inside of the plane.=A0 =

Remember too you will have to repaint and getting the paint to match up is hard.

My vote is do= n't do it.=A0 I have flown in both small and large MKII tail 320's = and vote not a significant difference.=A0 I fly with power right down to th= e runway which provides just enough air over the tail to give me plenty of = control with no pitch problems.

That Dreamcatcher was an amazing plane if any of you remember it.=A0 It= had the picture of the Aztec Goddess underneath it and was just an incredi= ble airplane.=A0 I am sure Mike is sad he sold it and it was later destroye= d in an accident that was not the fault of the airplane.

I think that was late 80's early 90's that all happened.=A0 MIk= e was a great, energetic builder and Lancair promoter.=A0 I heard he wanted= to design his own airplane but is so busy now running his own company.

Matt


--- On Wed, 5/26/10, Larry Henney &= lt;LHenney@charter= .net> wrote:

From: Larry Henney <LHenney@charter.net>
Subject: [LML] 320/360 tail mod
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Wednesday, May 26, 2010, 11:41 AM

=20
Danny,
=A0
I've flown a lot in both=20 big and small tails and hardly notice a difference anymore,=A0but I do pref= er=20 the large tail.=A0 One practical consideration I've seen with students = in the=20 small tail is the need for a little more precise airspeed control on=20 final.=A0 If one is 10 kts fast in the large tail it seems less sensitive i= n=20 the flare than the same error in the small tail.=A0 This should not matter= =20 however, I'm only suggesting flying a precise 1.3 Vso on final.=A0 When= =20 airspeed is properly scanned the small tail flares and lands nicely.=A0 I&#= 39;ve=20 seen a lot of PIO while waiting for the airspeed to arrive at 1.3Vso or les= s in=20 the flare.=A0 It's highly self critiquing and highly entertaining for t= he=20 instructor.
=A0
Retrofit?=A0=20 Hmmm.=A0 I've not known of a single small tail driver who actually did = it=20 after flying.=A0 I'd guess it would not be too much pain to do for an= =20 experienced builder.=A0 Does Lancair still stock/ sell retrofit tails?=A0= =20 If they sell the carbon MK II tail in a fast build version I expect it coul= d be=20 done in less than a month but it would be a huge undertaking for a novice= =20 builder (imho).
=A0
Good Luck with your=20 decision.
=A0
Larry Henney
N360LH (big=20 tail)
930 hrs

From: LenS790501@aol.com [mailto:LenS790501@aol.com]=20
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 3:13 PM
To:=20 lml@lancaironlin= e.net
Subject: Re: [LML] 320/360 tail=20 mod

Danny,
There are many small tail 320/360s out there flying, including mine wi= th=20 over 700 hours, and they are not squirrely at all. Mine is extremely stable= in=20 slow flight and there is no PIO during landing. Have you flown the plane yo= u're=20 considering? That would be my first suggestion so you can see for=20 yourself.
Len Spina
N15EG
=A0
In a message dated 5/25/2010 9:28:07 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,= =20 dannymiller@wow= way.com writes:
Hi folks, I'm new here and I=20 have no doubts this has been discussed at
length in the past.=A0 I'= ;m=20 considering the purchase of a 320 with the original
tail and from=20 everything I've read it seems to be a squirrely a/c subject to
PIO= in the=20 landing configuration.=A0 Can you direct me to additional resources
th= at=20 describe the time/effort/expense, etc. involved in retrofitting the
ta= il=20 section?

Thanks,
Danny


--For archives and unsub=20 http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html