X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 22:27:25 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from vms173007pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.7] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.8) with ESMTP id 4383046 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 06 Jul 2010 20:51:10 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=206.46.173.7; envelope-from=n5zq@verizon.net Received: from userb4f768e51f ([unknown] [173.72.167.62]) by vms173007.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0L5500BE2X05E733@vms173007.mailsrvcs.net> for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 06 Jul 2010 19:50:30 -0500 (CDT) Reply-to: From: "Bill N5ZQ" X-Original-To: "'Lancair Mailing List'" Subject: RE: [LML] Re: MK II Tail X-Original-Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 20:51:03 -0400 X-Original-Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 Importance: Normal In-reply-to: X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5931 Good point Wolfgang. I believe that Angier's comment and my reply were both meant more in jest than in the spirit of practicality. However, here are my very condensed thoughts on small vs. large tail. The small tail is: 1. Smaller, less wetted area, less drag. 2. Lighter 3. Simpler 4. electrically transparent (you can put your vhf nav antenna inside) 5. has not produced any structural stresses that requires additional bids in the fuselage (the large tail has) 6. I personally, haven't found any appreciable advantage in either stability or stall recovery characteristics with the large tail. I regularly stall airplanes with both tails and although the stall, if allowed to progress, will often break fairly hard one way or the other, normal stall recovery technique (stop the nose with the rudder) if applied with some alacrity along with releasing back pressure and applying power will produce acceptable stall recovery with either tail. My conclusion is that I fail to find sufficient advantage in the large tail to counter the disadvantages. Anyway, it's been that way for 17 years so why change now? Bill Harrelson N5ZQ 320 1,800 hrs N6ZQ IV under construction -----Original Message----- On Behalf Of Wolfgang Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 4:05 PM Subject: [LML] Re: MK II Tail Most of these comments, most in favor of the small tail, fail to quantify the difference in any meaningful way . . . which is quite aggravating. I get the sense that "It's been that way for 50 years so why change now ?" attitude is the rule of the land. I don't see how that is supposed to help others that know nothing of the difference understand the difference. . . . Isn't that what this list is for ? Wolfgang