| Nah, you guys are all wrong about the dramatic thing (having seen departures in the T-38 and F-4 but not the F-105).
Dramatic is the "snap-roll" my face used to do at the hands of my x-wife, even with the ball centered. And unlike the F-105, there was never any warning at all. No pre-stall buffeting. Just a radical and instantaneous departure from controlled flight without any warning.....
Eventually, we got into a flat spin. "Stick Forward, Ailerons and Rudder Neutral. If not recovered, maintain full forward stick and deploy drag chute."
If that doesn't work, you either bail out or die.
I bailed out, and other than a few war wounds, lived to tell about it!
John Hafen 413AJ IVP
On Jul 5, 2010, at 6:04 PM, Bill Kennedy wrote: "Dramatic" is a snap roll like the F-105 would do in a deep stall without the ball centered. It's easy to recover, but not a wonderful flight characteristic. Plenty of warning -- lots of pre-stall buffeting. I wouldn't contemplate changing tails (small to large or large to small). Too much work and too little gain.
To: lml@lancaironline.netDate: Mon, 5 Jul 2010 08:51:46 -0400 From: gt_phantom@hotmail.comSubject: [LML] Re: 320/360 MK II tail If the power off stall in your plane is "dramatic," then it is different than either my small tail 320 or my previous 235. Then again, we might just have a different definition of "dramatic." To me "dramatic" would be the stall characteristics of a T-38 or F-4, not these wonderful and responsive toys. :-) If you like your plane, that is what is important. For myself, there isn't much that I would change about my plane even if I could - unless it were to add yet more power. But then, that's something you can never have too much of. All I really know is that I love my plane, which happens to be a small tail, and given that I love it like it is I wouldn't want to give up even 2 knots for a change that a) won't change my flying pleasure one bit and b) might make my plane less rugged and c) might interfere with my communications. But hey, this is the experimental world and the beauty is that we can all say, "I want to do this differently." Cheers all Bill On 14:59, Bill Kennedy wrote: I've got the larger, carbon fiber tail on my 320. In spite of your opinion, it doesn't seem much like any Cessna I've flown. My guess is that it flies a lot like the small tail version, except it has better elevator response over a broader speed range. Being carbon fiber, it may not have added any weight, but I don't really know.
My notion is that Lancair didn't "...mess up a good thing", but fixed a bad thing. I've been very happy with the flying qualities of N42BK except for its rather dramatic power off stall characteristics (which I cannot imagine being any better with the small tail).
Bill Kennedy
N42BK, 599.6
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 07:28:51 -0400
From: anpfield@sbcglobal.net
Subject: [LML] Re: 320/360 MK II tail
Well said, Bill Rumburg!!! Don’t mess up a good thing. Pete Field 320, Small Tail N775DX, St. Louis Many have cut off (and continue to cut off) the original 320 'small' elevator/horizontal stabilizer. The 320/360 is a sport plane and it's a shame to cut off or abandon the origional elevator/horizontal stabilizer and replace it with the heavy MK II elevator/horizontal stabilizer, turning it into a 'Cessna', as dictated by the Austalian CAA ...a SHAME! I built and have flown a 320 with the original elevator/horizontal stabilizer for twelve years. It's a sport plane and NOT a Cessna!
The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Get started. --
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Get started.
|