X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:06:01 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mta21.charter.net ([216.33.127.81] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.4) with ESMTP id 4179766 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 10:56:58 -0400 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 <20100326145622.JICE75.mta21.charter.net@imp09> for ; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 10:56:22 -0400 Received: from Farnsworth ([75.139.158.86]) by imp09 with smtp.charter.net id xqwF1d0081s7vFP05qwLXP; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 10:56:21 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=JdAcf9kfJ9tm0voEjWwA:9 a=UMf7eHTusMlJqZlhttWPCu-NFKgA:4 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=cg8FdS_aOZM3P5q7:21 a=pLt50_IGTmc4vCkW:21 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=fZmPHqhvXRHSXM-RI_YA:9 a=Z5xku53JD6PZdzyHliYA:7 a=UHmB2CIpZ9LnoIroaNYHCPOuGmMA:4 From: "farnsworth" X-Original-To: "'Lancair Mailing List'" Subject: Fox Article X-Original-Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 10:56:25 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <0ADF43E568EB41F0980FE154EEA0CE8D@Farnsworth> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_067F_01CACCD2.FF10A5C0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 Thread-Index: AcrM9IHIhW9EM4hRRQa645C0IY8mCA== This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_067F_01CACCD2.FF10A5C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My reply to Fox News There is nothing holy, sacred or even significant about a 61 mph stalling speed. Why not pick 41 or 51 or 161 mph? All aircraft that are used by the airlines have a stalling speed greater than 61 mph. Does that make their aircraft unsafe? The fact of the matter is that a given aircraft has many "stalling speeds". The speed varies with weight, number or "G" forces and even altitude and temperature will affect the true airspeed at which an aircraft will stall. It appears to me, that the person who wrote this article did so with an eye toward damning Lancairs and experimental aircraft in general. The Lancair aircraft that landed on the beach did not do so as a result of a stall, but mechanical failure. So why the fascination with stall speeds? Even the widely referenced "Piper Cub" will stall with just enough speed to kill a person! I can address this article from many many years of flying experience that include: Piper Cubs, jet fighters, airliners and Lancair aircraft. I have often stated that the Lancair Legacy, that I fly, is one of the best flying aircraft I have ever flown. Lynn Farnsworth Super Legacy #235 TSIO-550 Powered Race #44 ------=_NextPart_000_067F_01CACCD2.FF10A5C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

My reply to Fox News

There is nothing holy, sacred or even significant = about a 61 mph stalling speed. Why not pick 41 or 51 or 161 mph? All aircraft that = are used by the airlines have a stalling speed greater than 61 mph. Does = that make their aircraft unsafe?

The fact of the matter is that a given aircraft has = many "stalling speeds". The speed varies with weight, number or "G" forces and even altitude and temperature will affect the = true airspeed at which an aircraft will stall.

It appears to me, that the person who wrote this = article did so with an eye toward damning Lancairs and experimental aircraft in = general. The Lancair aircraft that landed on the beach did not do so as a result = of a stall, but mechanical failure. So why the fascination with stall speeds? = Even the widely referenced "Piper Cub" will stall with just enough = speed to kill a person!

I can address this article from many many years of = flying experience that include: Piper Cubs, jet fighters, airliners and Lancair aircraft. I have often stated that the Lancair Legacy, that I fly, is = one of the best flying aircraft I have ever flown.

Lynn Farnsworth

Super Legacy #235

TSIO-550 Powered

Race #44

------=_NextPart_000_067F_01CACCD2.FF10A5C0--