Hi Charles,
Thanks for your thoughts on the lightning strike subject.  If the
following quote is true, I would feel a lot better.  However, I've
attended all (known to me) lightning forums presented at Oshkosh in the
last 20 years and for the most part I came away scared to death to fly my
glass Lancair in a sky shared by thunderstorms.  I would prefer to
believe your 'insulation' theory.  I have 30+ years of
instrument/electrical experience with GE which may be the reason I'm
skeptical. The abundant thunderstorms in S Indiana keep me grounded in
the Lancair when I will fly the Cessna (but not in thunderstorm clouds).
Until I'm convinced otherwise, I reluctantly advise future builders to
stick with metal airplanes if you plan to fly in the Summer in the
Midwest. I certainly hope others will jump in to help convince me my
heightened fears should be downgraded to at least YELLOW and below.
Earl E Schroeder Lancair N233EE Cessna N3595J
Evansville, Indiana  47712



> 4) And finally, the glass cloth model. Glass/epoxy is less  conductive
> than air and therefore doesn’t carry any current at all therefore no  
> power dissipation. The lighting bolt can strike through the glass to a
> conductive surface, such as carbon or aluminum at which point the
> equations above take over for the path. But typical numbers used to
> design electrical insulation have values like 1KV/milliinch of
thickness
> so with only a few mills of glass insulation, the air breaks down and
> the electricity follows the ionized path in air (read lightning bolt!)
> It just plain doesn’t want to go in the glass/epoxy at all.