X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 23:05:29 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nm9-vm0.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com ([98.139.213.154] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.5) with SMTP id 6294726 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 28 May 2013 17:42:12 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=98.139.213.154; envelope-from=n20087@yahoo.com Received: from [98.139.214.32] by nm9.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 28 May 2013 21:41:36 -0000 Received: from [98.139.211.197] by tm15.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 28 May 2013 21:41:36 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 28 May 2013 21:41:36 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 529968.78174.bm@smtp206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: _SKQygoVM1l9I_eUqebZbzfLSjtMj1o0ifP.byGBRLJr.b2 fBM2KchUlRQtYBipPd54NRSpB5bJvcd877dP5rKiJOZ6ki2dV37txBWSLdCF gyCsFc2pL2S2DHfZeu8qlZbFMlzih4l_XCvnXNuJvWi0oIcOTIRNe4UZluRv Hfj6S3XlWpWAFkpiY8phDZRCzJ0rTXr4_xUmI8k6QXeaQPtXpFyjo8gGMwN. pS1JCeYBswotZ6Nh08aEy6Jgc0jBlDDmyYyRrQflXYd8YSOg5igzpib5Bymh eX_9dWPTJ_mg9HVYcGlPfNGl2ugMNjz7KnhrEAaYwytqGcIB01Q_ywSKg5T_ z.n82u9wK6c8fk938kLV7jjFN_TE8TELu_Z5aiZ26tjxu3dc0mJg7gAJe.1a w6YzCy9fIbZj6oLrQBEgZA_0wgZk6ro1KQDg_FeOrJ48wHKdsQRKS_1CjLEv Obnof8DcKAvI.6OView7W0w-- X-Yahoo-SMTP: NQQt3c2swBAKSrExoA1eZuT7_w-- X-Rocket-Received: from [10.16.131.150] (n20087@198.228.226.49 with ) by smtp206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 May 2013 14:41:36 -0700 PDT Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Lancair Aerobatics References: From: Tom Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-692A37CC-7BDE-48BC-9824-9DE10A298858 X-Mailer: iPad Mail (10A8426) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Message-Id: <47FC5397-2437-4BB0-86F0-C7B0E67C9F57@yahoo.com> X-Original-Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 17:41:36 -0400 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) --Apple-Mail-692A37CC-7BDE-48BC-9824-9DE10A298858 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Awesome. Thanks Tom Sent from my iPad On May 28, 2013, at 5:34 PM, Sky2high@aol.com wrote: > Tom, et al, > =20 > OK, here it is from the horse's mouth .......=20 > =20 > Page 9 of Chapter I of the POH (Dec 1994) claims a 320/360 wing loading of= 22.17 lbs per sq ft at max takeoff weight (MTOW). Page 10 of Chapter II st= ates the 320/360 MTOW is 1685 lbs. 1685/22.17 =3D 76 sq ft wing area. For t= hose that increased their MTOW to 1800 lbs, the wing loading would be calcul= ated as 1800/76 =3D 23.7 along with a reduction in the load factor limit to (= 1685 x 4.5)/1800 =3D +4.2 G=E2=80=99s instead of +4.5 G's.. > =20 > Blue Skies, > =20 > Grayhawk > =20 > Literature? Insight? Wikileaks? > =20 > In a message dated 5/28/2013 3:58:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time, n20087@ya= hoo.com writes: > I have seen the 19lb/sq ft number quoted in at least 2 places but as grayh= awk points out the math does not work out. I have also seen the wing area q= uoted as 78sq ft. In addition, on a long trip with my wife I am always 180= 0# where I certified the aircraft. That puts me in the region of 26lb/sq ft.= Anybody have the "real" wing area and insight to why 19lb/sq ft turns up i= n the literature? >=20 > Thanks >=20 > Tom >=20 > Sent from my iPad >=20 > On May 28, 2013, at 1:53 PM, Sky2high@aol.com wrote: >=20 >> 320/370 wing area =3D 70 sq. ft. Avg operating weight of 360 =3D 1600 lb= s. Wing loading =3D 22.857142857142 >> =20 >> Grayhawk >> =20 >> PS Quad Cities Challenger II =3D 5 lbs/sq ft. - exciting in turbulence. >> =20 >> In a message dated 5/28/2013 12:38:45 P.M. Central Daylight Time, cwfmd@y= ahoo.com writes: >> Airframe Wing Loading =20 >>=20 >> Cessna 150/172 10.5 traffic pattern hazard! >> Pitts S2 13 >> RV8 15.5 >> Lancair 360 19 >> Lancair IV-P 36.2 ! >>=20 >> Internet poll- not scientific or stat signif --Apple-Mail-692A37CC-7BDE-48BC-9824-9DE10A298858 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Awesome. Thanks

Tom

Sent from my iPad

On May 28, 2013, at 5:34 PM, <= a href=3D"mailto:Sky2high@aol.com">Sky2high@aol.com wrote:

=
Tom, et al,
 
OK, here it is from the horse's mouth ....... 
 

Page 9 of Chapter I o= f the POH=20 (Dec 1994) claims a 320/360 wing loading of 22.17 lbs per sq ft at max takeo= ff=20 weight (MTOW).  Page 10 of Cha= pter=20 II states the 320/360 MTOW is 1685 lbs.  For those that increased their MTOW to=20 1800 lbs, the wing loading would be calculated as 1800/76 =3D 23.7 = ;along=20 with a reduction in the load factor limit to (1685 x 4.5)/1800 =3D +4.2= G=E2=80=99s=20 instead of +4.5 G's..

 

Blue Skies,

 

Grayhawk

 

Literature?  In= sight?=20 Wikileaks?

 
In a message dated 5/28/2013 3:58:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time,=20 n20087@yahoo.com writes:
I have seen the 19lb/sq ft number quoted in at least 2 places but as=20= grayhawk points out the math does not work out.  I have also seen the= =20 wing area quoted as 78sq ft.   In addition, on a long trip with my wi= fe I=20 am always 1800# where I certified the aircraft. That puts me in the region= of=20 26lb/sq ft.  Anybody have the "real" wing area and insight to why 19l= b/sq=20 ft turns up in the literature?

Thanks

Tom

Sent from my iPad

On May 28, 2013, at 1:53 PM, Sky2high@aol.com wrote:

320/370 wing area =3D 70 sq. ft.  Avg operating weight of 360 =3D= 1600=20 lbs.  Wing loading =3D 22.857142857142
 
Grayhawk
 
PS Quad Cities Challenger II =3D 5 lbs/sq ft. - exciting in=20 turbulence.
 
In a message dated 5/28/2013 12:38:45 P.M. Central Daylight Time, <= a title=3D"mailto:cwfmd@yahoo.com" href=3D"mailto:cwfmd@yahoo.com">cwfmd@yah= oo.com writes:
Airframe          &nbs= p;=20 Wing Loading   

Cessna=20 150/172     10.5   traffic pattern= =20 hazard!
Pitts=20 S2          &n= bsp;      =20 13
RV8         &= nbsp;            = ;=20 15.5
Lancair=20 360          &= nbsp;=20 19
Lancair=20 IV-P          = =20 36.2    !

Internet poll- not scientific or stat= =20 signif
= = --Apple-Mail-692A37CC-7BDE-48BC-9824-9DE10A298858--