Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:25:59 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-m21.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.2] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2b6) with ESMTP id 225231 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:04:46 -0400 Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-m21.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r2.6.) id q.1a3.2608bd6e (3964) for ; Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:04:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <1a3.2608bd6e.2e0c8dbd@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 16:04:13 EDT Subject: Re: [LML] CG and Gross Weight [LNC2] X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1088107453" X-Mailer: 9.0 for Windows sub 5000 -------------------------------1088107453 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 6/24/2004 2:09:21 AM Central Standard Time, nospam@pure-flight.com writes: At first I was too busy to raise the gear, then I chose to leave the landing gear down to keep the CG from moving any further aft. As we climbed slowly to 3000 feet, I started the transfer pump to move fuel from the wings to the nose, and headed for a nearby airport with a longer, wider runway (5000 feet), as I wasn't sure I could safely land where I had launched. Along the way, I explained the situation to my passenger then had him drag my flight bag from the baggage area to his lap, while I leaned forward over the stick. Once the flightbag (10 lbs) was moved to the seat, the pitch oscillations completely stopped, and I could comfortably trim the plane to fly hands-off. The flightbag moved the CG forward no more than about 0.2". Fuel transfer might have also contributed a little. Bob, I have been a bit busy but I am glad Mark (Speed Demon) Ravinski replied and I agree completely with him. Speed makes things better so leaving the gear down is a bit of a problem. I thought that throwing out the gear might be something to do if you can't get out of a rear-CG exacerbated flat spin. However, I haven't been there and I am not interested in doing that sort of maneuver. Leaving the flaps in "takeoff" position (or slightly less) might be a better solution. Since the 235/320/360's experience such a strong nose down pitching moment when the flaps are taken out of reflex, such an action might "trim out" some of the rear CG pitch instability without adding too much drag. I have anecdotal information that this procedure seemed to add pitch stability to an overloaded rearward-CG 360 with wing extensions. Perhaps someone would perform this sort of experiment on their next ill-conceived overloaded flight (Bill H. excepted). Or, better yet, someone has already done this and will report how it worked out so that we might learn. Scott Krueger AKA Grayhawk Sky2high@aol.com II-P N92EX IO320 Aurora, IL (KARR) LML, where ideas collide and you decide! -------------------------------1088107453 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In a message dated 6/24/2004 2:09:21 AM Central Standard Time,=20 nospam@pure-flight.com writes:

<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>At first=20 I was too busy to raise the
gear, then I chose to leave the landing gea= r=20 down to keep the CG
from moving any further aft.

As we climbed=20 slowly to 3000 feet, I started the transfer pump to move
fuel from the=20 wings to the nose, and headed for a nearby airport with
a longer, wider= =20 runway (5000 feet), as I wasn't sure I could safely land
where I had=20 launched. Along the way, I explained the situation to my
passenger then= had=20 him drag my flight bag from the baggage area to his
lap, while I leaned= =20 forward over the stick. Once the flightbag (10 lbs)
was moved to the se= at,=20 the pitch oscillations completely stopped, and I
could comfortably trim= the=20 plane to fly hands-off. The flightbag moved
the CG forward no more than= =20 about 0.2". Fuel transfer might have also
contributed a=20 little.

Bob,

I have been a bit busy but I am glad Mark (Speed Demon) Ravinski replie= d=20 and I agree completely with him.

Speed makes things better so leaving the gear down is a bit of a=20 problem. I thought that throwing out the gear might be something to do= if=20 you can't get out of a rear-CG exacerbated flat spin. However, I=20 haven't been there and I am not interested in doing that sort of maneuver.

Leaving the flaps in "takeoff" position (or slightly less) might be a=20 better solution. Since the 235/320/360's experience such a strong= =20 nose down pitching moment when the flaps are taken out of reflex, such an ac= tion=20 might "trim out" some of the rear CG pitch instability without adding too mu= ch=20 drag. I have anecdotal information that this procedure seemed to=20= add=20 pitch stability to an overloaded rearward-CG 360 with wing extensions.

Perhaps someone would perform this sort of experiment on their next=20 ill-conceived overloaded flight (Bill H. excepted). Or, better yet,=20 someone has already done this and will report how it worked out so that we m= ight=20 learn.=20

Scott Krueger=20 AKA Grayhawk
Sky2high@aol.com
II-P N92EX IO320 Aurora, IL=20 (KARR)

LML, where ideas collide and you=20 decide!

-------------------------------1088107453--