|
Randy,
You have twisted some words (again). To
wit: "the LML police insist that the
published Vne is the point of distruction(sic)"
Neither I nor anyone else who has commented on this
thread ever said that. We all know Vne is set with a
margin for safety. The point is that this margin is not a finite
number, so by exceeding redline airspeed, you have no idea how close
you may be to a point of structural failure. At speeds above the
green arc, a good jolt of unexpected turbulence has the potential to break
something. Above Vne, that potential grows exponentially and at some
undefined point in every Lancair, structural failure is a certainty.
What Lancair does by setting a Vne is put out a number that
hopefully protects all builders from such a catastrophic event.
You've often cited race pilots who often exceed Vne, but those planes were
structurally modified to do that. Did you personally build your plane and
if so, did you make such modifications to it? Also, keep in mind that
insurance is not the same for someone who races their plane when you talk about
your low premiums.
You claim that "The Lancair designers,
I'm sure, were very conservative with their numbers." First, neither
you or anyone else on the list knows exactly how conservative they were.
By exceeding Vne by any amount, you're guessing how much.
To a career pilot like myself, that's like guessing whether there's a
bullet in the chamber of a pistol while playing Russian Roulette.
Odds are that you'll get away with it, but that doesn't make it a good
idea.
You also said, "All Lancair's were
designed safe and should be flown within the published limits, I agree."
If that's all you said, we wouldn't be having this discussion. But in the
same post, you also said, "I never said I fly past Vne
all the time, I said I have and do on occasion in the right
conditions.", which would seem to conflict with the previous
statement. I don't know how you define the "right conditions" to exceed a
manufacturer set limitation and violate FAR's, but several very experienced
pilots on this list have simply expressed to you that it's a bad practice.
For that we've been labeled "Police". I'd have preferred that you
simply accept the fact that our interest is purely in your safety and that of
your passengers. That should be a common thread among all of us on the
LML. We clearly can't make you heed our advice, but speaking for myself,
it is my great hope that this discussion may influence some other current or
potential Lancair driver that they should think long and
hard before doing something like ignoring a P.O.H.
limitation.
Happy landings,
Skip
Slater
|