Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 12:52:22 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-5018092@logan.com>
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=206.46.173.11; envelope-from=danny.miller@verizon.net
From: "Danny Miller" <danny.miller@verizon.net>
References: <redirect-5011109@logan.com>
In-reply-to: <redirect-5011109@logan.com>
Subject: RE: Short tail - short engine mount
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Thread-index: AcwkaeKsCGzhUIBISci1ybo4X6khUADD6DsA
Content-language: en-us

I disagree.  I spent several months looking at over 50 LNC2 candidates to
purchase.  I looked at every conceivable configuration there is.  Paramount
with me was CG.  I'm 220 lbs. and my son is 240 lbs. so putting two heavy
people in the seats and staying in the CG envelope was critical under all
circumstances.  I found an overwhelming number of aircraft that simply
wouldn't work for me.  And I found none of the short mount configurations
would work, not one.  Tail type had no bearing whatsoever.

Danny Miller
N107SD, KHEF

-----Original Message-----
From: George Shattuck [mailto:gws37@plantationcable.net] 
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2011 12:51 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: Short tail - short engine mount

I second Bill Harrelson's comments.  I have 1500 +/- hours on my 320, small 
tail, short mount, 1989 kit and have no adverse comments or complaints.  The

only thing I can see with the big tail is more drag thus a few knots less 
TAS.  It seems to me that the big tail/small tail debate and fix centered 
around a solution to a problem that did not exist.

George Shattuck
LNC2, Greensboro, GA


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lancair Mailing List" <lml@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 6:00 AM
Subject: lml Digest #3406


>        Lancair Mailing List Digest #3406
>
> 1) LOBO Oshkosh banquet
>    by <marv@lancair.net>
> 2) Re: L-IV Choice of Engine
>    by Gary Casey <casey.gary@yahoo.com>
> 3) Please post this for David.
>    by Bryan Wullner <vonjet@gmail.com>
> 4) Re: LNC2 flying in Brazil
>    by "Novelli" <ppxsn@novellisouza.com.br>
> 5) Re: Optimum IO-550 oil level - zero oil pressure event
>    by "Dana Westphal" <needforspeed01@cox.net>
> 6) Oshkosh Lancair Gathering & BBQ
>    by "Lisa Williams" <lisaw@lancair.com>
> 7) Re: Long mount / short tail
>    by "Wolfgang" <Wolfgang@MiCom.net>
> 8) fuel vent check valve design issue?
>    by Colyn Case <Colyncase@earthlink.net>
> 9) Re: Long mount / short tail
>    by "Phillip J. Kocmoud" <pkocmoud@hyper-it.com>
> 10) The wooden Lancair
>    by pathabu <pathabu@aol.com>
> 11) Re: Long mount / short tail
>    by "Peter Field" <anpfield@sbcglobal.net>
> 12) Re: L-IV Choice of Engine
>    by "Lancair" <lancair-esp@ustek.com>
> 13) Re: Fuel restriction or air Part 3
>    by Berni <bbreen@cableone.net>
> 14) Re: Change the speed of the ROC servo  for trim
>    by Colyn Case <colyncase@earthlink.net>
> 15) Re: Long mount / short tail
>    by "Bill Harrelson" <n5zq@verizon.net>
> 16) Re: oil level
>    by Duane Allen <c177av8r@pacbell.net>
>
> This digest is sent to you because you are subscribed to
>  the mailing list <lml@lancaironline.net>.
> For archives and help click 
> http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/Lists/lml/List.html
> LML website: http://www.lancaironline.net/maillist.html
>