X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 06:05:59 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [74.208.5.67] (HELO mailout-us.mail.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.0) with SMTP id 5030157 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 13:52:10 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=74.208.5.67; envelope-from=cfi@instructor.net Received: (qmail 30111 invoked by uid 0); 23 Jun 2011 17:51:02 -0000 Received: from 184.88.13.235 by rms-us013.v300.gmx.net with HTTP Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="========GMXBoundary42831308851461104375" X-Original-Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 17:51:00 +0000 From: "Ron Galbraith" X-Original-Message-ID: <20110623175101.42830@gmx.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Columbia 400 X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" X-Authenticated: #73491717 X-Flags: 0001 X-Mailer: GMX.com Web Mailer x-registered: 0 X-GMX-UID: M0gxdowjmCvxezBRVzE2O3I7MTE2NUlX --========GMXBoundary42831308851461104375 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The Lancair IV glide ratio is much lower than the Columbia with flat pitch prop and the IV edges out the Columbia by quite a lot if you have a counter weighted or feathering prop, and just slightly with props in course position. (with IV being in clean configuration) The Columbia and ES are very close to the same in all configurations. I've been flying Lancairs for 12 years and currently own a Columbia400. These are just my observations. RonG ----- Original Message ----- From: Greenbacks, UnLtd. Sent: 06/23/11 07:42 AM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Re: Columbia 400 My next door hangar neighbor recently purchased a Columbia 400 and I'm wondering if you IV guys can make a comparison of its glide capabilities vs the IV. Angier Ames N4ZQ IN THE PAINT BOOTH...:-) -- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html --========GMXBoundary42831308851461104375 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
= =20 The Lancair IV glide ratio is much lower than the Columbia with flat pitch = prop and the IV edges out the Columbia by quite a lot if you have a counter= weighted or feathering prop, and just slightly with props in course positi= on. (with IV being in clean configuration)  The Columbia and ES are ve= ry close to the same in all configurations.   I've been flying La= ncairs for 12 years and currently own a Columbia400.   These are = just my observations. 
=20
=20 RonG
=20
=20

=20 =C2=A0

=20
=20

=20 ----- = Original Message -----

=20

=20 From: = Greenbacks, UnLtd.

=20

=20 Sent: = 06/23/11 07:42 AM

=20

=20 To: lm= l@lancaironline.net

=20

=20 Subjec= t: [LML] Re: Columbia 400

=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
My next door hangar neighbor recently purchased a Columbia 400 and I'm wond=
ering if you IV guys can make a comparison of its glide capabilities vs the=
 IV.=20

Angier Ames=20
N4ZQ=20
IN THE PAINT BOOTH...:-)=20
--=20
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html=
=20
=20
=20
=20

=20 =C2=A0

=20
--========GMXBoundary42831308851461104375--