X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:28:45 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from rwcrmhc14.comcast.net ([216.148.227.154] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with ESMTP id 2457479 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 21:24:16 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.148.227.154; envelope-from=rbelshe@comcast.net Received: from desk (c-71-202-81-117.hsd1.ca.comcast.net[71.202.81.117]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc14) with SMTP id <20071106022336m14004lj7te>; Tue, 6 Nov 2007 02:23:36 +0000 From: "Bob B." X-Original-To: "'Lancair Mailing List'" References: Subject: RE: [LML] Needing performance information on the Lancair 200 and 235 X-Original-Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 18:23:34 -0800 X-Original-Message-ID: <007b01c8201c$07da0180$6601a8c0@desk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_007C_01C81FD8.F9B6C180" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Thread-Index: AcgftYTxZkMfqzJFQ5m7SF5EyFJ0pgAZXigw In-Reply-To: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_007C_01C81FD8.F9B6C180 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Looking at data I saved from when I had the O235 engine and fixed pitch prop, I had airspeeds of around 140 kts at 2500 RPM and around 160 kts at 2700 RPM. This was with a Warnke 62" dia 72" pitch 2-blade wood propeller. If you are getting the engine up above 2500 RPM, then I would suspect your airspeed system has some kind of problem. Take another flight with a GPS and see what speeds you get. Bob Belshe Moraga, CA Lancair 235/320 http://home.comcast.net/~rbelshe/ _____ From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of kneaded pleasures Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 6:10 AM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Needing performance information on the Lancair 200 and 235 A close friend has a pristine Lancair 200 that he has asked me to fly and then render opinion on the aircraft's performance. It looks great and has obvious excellent workmanship in its construction. After a thorough annual condition inspection, I flew it and found that it was seriously lacking in power. In fact, with just 10 degrees of flaps and gear extended, it never accelerated beyond 60 knots (though it was simultaneously rising at about 400 ft per minute). I didn't immediately retract the gear because I was concerned that the plane was flying just above stall. In the traffic pattern, I retracted the gear and got just 78 knots - still with 10 degrees flap. I landed uneventfully. There was no abnormal balance or control of the airplane and, in fact, its construction symmetry is nearly perfect. Jack test of the landing gear showed completely flush retract of gear and doors - not likely that something was dragging. This plane has an 0200 engine with 9 to 1 pistons producing some extra horsepower; perhaps a total of 115. Its prop is a light weight (27 lbs) cockpit adjustable, electric IVOPROP. Does performance sound right for such an early version aircraft? Who has had experience in these underpowered planes? What performance numbers should we be seeing? Without more power and speed, I would be reluctant to take on a passenger for flight. Greg Nelson ------=_NextPart_000_007C_01C81FD8.F9B6C180 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Looking at data I saved from when I had the O235 engine and = fixed pitch=20 prop, I had airspeeds of around 140 kts at 2500 RPM and around 160 kts = at 2700=20 RPM.

This was with a Warnke 62" dia=20 72" pitch 2-blade wood=20 propeller.

If you are getting the engine = up above=20 2500 RPM, then I would suspect your airspeed system has some kind of=20 problem. Take another flight with a GPS and see what speeds you=20 get.

Bob = Belshe
Moraga,=20 CA
Lancair 235/320
http://home.comcast.net/~rbelshe/=20

From: Lancair Mailing List=20 [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of kneaded=20 pleasures
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 6:10 = AM
To:=20 lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Needing performance = information=20 on the Lancair 200 and 235

A close friend has a pristine Lancair 200 that he has asked me to = fly=20 and then render opinion on the aircraft's performance. = It=20 looks great and has obvious excellent workmanship in its = construction. =20 After a thorough annual condition inspection, I flew it and found that = it was=20 seriously lacking in power. In fact, with just 10 degrees of = flaps and=20 gear extended, it never accelerated beyond 60 knots (though = it was=20 simultaneously rising at about 400 ft per minute). I didn't = immediately=20 retract the gear because I was concerned that the plane was flying = just above=20 stall. In the traffic pattern, I retracted the gear and got just = 78=20 knots - still with 10 degrees flap. I = landed uneventfully. =20 There was no abnormal balance or control of the airplane and, in fact, = its=20 construction symmetry is nearly perfect. Jack test of the = landing gear=20 showed completely flush retract of gear and doors - not likely that = something=20 was dragging. This plane has an 0200 engine with 9 to = 1=20 pistons producing some extra horsepower; perhaps a total of = 115. =20 Its prop is a light weight (27 lbs) cockpit adjustable, electric=20 IVOPROP.

Does performance sound right for such an early version=20 aircraft? Who has had experience in these underpowered = planes? =20 What performance numbers should we be seeing? Without more power = and=20 speed, I would be reluctant to take on a passenger for = flight. =20 Greg Nelson

------=_NextPart_000_007C_01C81FD8.F9B6C180--