X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:24:08 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mta21.charter.net ([216.33.127.81] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3c3) with ESMTP id 4002151 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 04 Dec 2009 09:00:13 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.33.127.81; envelope-from=farnsworth@charter.net Received: from imp09 ([10.20.200.9]) by mta21.charter.net (InterMail vM.7.09.02.04 201-2219-117-106-20090629) with ESMTP id <20091204135938.WYKH21519.mta21.charter.net@imp09> for ; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 08:59:38 -0500 Received: from Farnsworth ([75.139.158.86]) by imp09 with smtp.charter.net id D1zV1d00e1s7vFP051zaGT; Fri, 04 Dec 2009 08:59:34 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=lh4xrUZ2bCsA:10 a=IUJm0-ZgjXduN2Dqw1gA:9 a=L83gztfw7LsIZdt23j8A:7 a=prOsl2tUEY5zRivl6FlyX-8YYQsA:4 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=l-NG_l6JFxBtIDa5kmUA:9 a=0BEAOB9qkq1PjUD00ogA:7 a=bcfg996U2v-ZDHqJabilYhJ8u60A:4 From: "farnsworth" X-Original-To: "'Lancair Mailing List'" References: Subject: RE: [LML] Re: Vne is NOT a meaningless number X-Original-Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 08:59:34 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <97D8D39BABAE48BA9B897DBEC2792250@Farnsworth> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0045_01CA74C0.1FC57EA0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: Acp00+AWv4aY8soLTwCN8QWkGw/YjQADYZ0g This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0045_01CA74C0.1FC57EA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please recall Lynn, that in an earlier post, I mentioned not exceeding Vne in planes that were not specifically designed or modified to do so. Since I seem to recall that you beefed up your empennage because you race your plane, I believe it falls into that category, doesn't it? If that's the case, would you feel as comfortable flying as fast as you do had you not made those mods? Skip Skip, You are correct. The input from Greg Cole and the modification that was a result is what makes me feel very comfortable with the high speeds that I have seen in my Legacy. I also admit that the time I reached .56 Mach (with .6 Mach being the Limit) I was very careful as I did not want to exceed .6 Mach. Even though, when I fly by myself I wear a parachute and the airplane has an aft opening canopy, so it can be jettisoned, I don't have a great desire to make use of either. There are now a few Legacys that have turbocharged engines, but don't have the "Reno racing mod", and are capable of higher that standard speeds. Pete Z. and I both expressed some concern, to each other, at Reno this past year about that fact. It does appear that a Lancair built to the standards set by the manufacturer does have "reserve strength" beyond the published limit. If not, why would Lance and Joe support the race activity at Reno? Lance had Dave Morss race a company IV and Joe wants to know why we aren't going faster. I certainly understand the fact that all airplanes have limits and the aircraft that we fly, because of the individualized construction, probably have a wider variation of limits than certified aircraft. That being said, if an individual pilot explores and expands the flight envelope of his/her aircraft beyond that which is published, I think he/she should be able to fly there without being considered a rouge who is endangering the entire Lancair community. Regards, Lynn ------=_NextPart_000_0045_01CA74C0.1FC57EA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Please recall Lynn, that in an earlier post, I mentioned not exceeding Vne in planes that = were not specifically designed or modified to do so. Since I seem to = recall that you beefed up your empennage because you race your = plane, I believe it falls into that category, doesn't it? If that's = the case, would you feel as comfortable flying as fast as you do had you not made = those mods?

Skip

Skip,

You are correct. The input from = Greg Cole and the modification that was a result is what makes me feel very = comfortable with the high speeds that I have seen in my Legacy. I also admit that = the time I reached .56 Mach (with .6 Mach being the Limit) I was very careful as = I did not want to exceed .6 Mach. Even though, when I fly by myself I wear a parachute and the airplane has an aft opening canopy, so it can be = jettisoned, I don’t have a great desire to make use of = either.

There are now a few Legacys that = have turbocharged engines, but don’t have the “Reno racing mod”, and are = capable of higher that standard speeds. Pete Z. and I both expressed some concern, = to each other, at Reno this past year about that fact.

It does appear that a Lancair built = to the standards set by the manufacturer does have “reserve = strength” beyond the published limit. If not, why would Lance and Joe support the = race activity at Reno? Lance had Dave Morss race a company IV and Joe wants to know why we = aren’t going faster.

I certainly understand the fact = that all airplanes have limits and the aircraft that we fly, because of the individualized construction, probably have a wider variation of limits = than certified aircraft. That being said, if an individual pilot explores and expands the flight envelope of his/her aircraft beyond that which is = published, I think he/she should be able to fly there without being considered a = rouge who is endangering the entire Lancair community. =

Regards,

Lynn =

------=_NextPart_000_0045_01CA74C0.1FC57EA0--