X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 23:02:51 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.96] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.0) with ESMTP id 5031448 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 17:26:41 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=76.96.62.96; envelope-from=j.hafen@comcast.net Received: from omta21.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.72]) by qmta09.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id zxCw1g0051ZXKqc59xS8UL; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 21:26:08 +0000 Received: from [10.0.1.5] ([24.17.111.171]) by omta21.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id zxS31g01U3hvfg83hxS6uS; Fri, 24 Jun 2011 21:26:08 +0000 From: John Hafen Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-117--68919481 Subject: Re: [LML] Airplane needs to be "fixed," Stall Speeds, Wing Cuffs, Vortex Generators for L... X-Original-Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 14:26:02 -0700 In-Reply-To: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: X-Original-Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) --Apple-Mail-117--68919481 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 One has to choose between stall strips and a heated leading edge. For me personally, stall strips would be more applicable for my Cub, = which doesn't need them at all. And I have been in inadvertent icing = conditions in the IVP and watched the ice curl up like potato chips and = blow away. I'll keep the heated leading edge, thank you, rather than a = stall strip that I would never use. And as far as a larger tail??? A. Who is going to spend the additional money to make their IVP look = stupid? B. The IVP is tail heavy already -- no one wants to load extra weight = aft of the CG. C. Challenged pilots should perhaps fly a different plane. I love the IVP the way it is. I have never crashed and died. I = understand the envelope, and like it;) John (On military pilots and "training" to fly unstable air craft -- I don't = think you are accurate on this one. The F-16 is so unstable that it = requires 20+ inputs per second to maintain straight and level flight. = It is computerized. No human being on earth, no matter how highly = trained, can manually fly an F-16 straight and level. The "fly by wire" = F-16 is way easier to fly than my IVP. The original side stick didn't = move at all, but responded to pressure. Pilots hated it so it was = redesigned to move slightly. And the pilots wishes to go a computer = that controls the flight surfaces. There is no direct manual connection = from the stick to the flight control surfaces. Even in the old F4, the = flight control "feel" was artificial -- based on springs, as the = hydraulic system supplied 3,000 psi to the flight control surfaces, = which came in really handy over about mach 1.1. You don't need a = million dollars worth of training to fly a IVP safely. HPAT, yes.) On Jun 24, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Wolfgang wrote: Military aircraft are unstable to allow better agility. Military pilots get over a million dollars worth of training each to be = able to handle their "unstable" aircraft. =20 I don't see that happening for IVP drivers. =20 There are a couple of things that can be done that don't adversely = affect performance or handling. Stall strips and larger tail feathers come to mind. =20 Wolfgang =20 From: John Hafen Sender: Subject: Airplane needs to be "fixed," Stall Speeds, Wing Cuffs, = Vortex Generators for L... Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 06:05:59 -0400 To: lml@lancaironline.net Wolfgang states: "If the airframe can't get back in the envelope, then = the airframe needs to be fixed." There are lots of historical examples to the contrary, like the F4 = Phantom. Once in a flat spin, the plane was unrecoverable from any = altitude. "Stick Forward, Ailerons and Rudder Neutral, If not = Recovered, Maintain Full Forward Stick and Deploy Drag Shoot" were not = enough. =20 Yet the F4 was the work horse fighter for the Navy, Air Force, Marines, = and hosts of allies for decades. And it was fast, over Mach II. Yet, you stayed far far away from "departing" -- high angle of attack, = stick one way and the rudder the other..... Most advanced stalls in IVP are recoverable, given 10,000 feet or so. But unlike the F4, most of our IVPs are not equipped with Martin-Baker = ejection seats. The F4 never got fixed. The IVP got "fixed." It's called the "ES," = with larger differently shaped wings and fixed gear, that became the = Columbia/Cessna. The "fix" was a series of tradeoffs that IMHO made it a less desirable = plane -- slower, fixed gear, non-pressurized. I'll happily keep the un-fixed version of the IVP myself, thank you. =20 John Hafen On Jun 23, 2011, at 9:11 AM, Wolfgang wrote: I, for one, want to be able to recover from an "adverse" condition = should I ever find myself in one. Knowing where the edges of the envelope are and how to get beck in the = envelope should be required. If the airframe can't get back in the envelope, then the airframe needs = to be fixed. =20 Wolfgang ----- Original Message ----- From: Karen Farnsworth To: lml@lancaironline.net Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:12 PM Subject: RE: [LML] Re: Stall Speeds, Wing Cuffs, Vortex Generators for = L... David, I have no problem with anyone who wants to explore the =93envelope=94 of = his/her airplane. However, I take great exception to you grounding me = because I might choose to not get as near to the edge as you. Lynn Farnsworth Super Legacy #235 TSIO-550 Powered Reno Race #44 Mmo .6 I agree 100% also. If you don=92t know what the incipient stall feels like in the stick and = the airframe you should not be flying the Legacy or 320=92s.=20 (Not knowing this is the single biggest killer of Lancair pilots.) David T. Legacy --Apple-Mail-117--68919481 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 One has to choose between stall strips and a heated = leading edge.

For me personally, stall strips would = be more applicable for my Cub, which doesn't need them at all.  And = I have been in inadvertent icing conditions in the IVP and watched the = ice curl up like potato chips and blow away.  I'll keep the heated = leading edge, thank you, rather than a stall strip that I would never = use.

And as far as a larger = tail???
  A.  Who is going to spend the = additional money to make their IVP look stupid?
  B. =  The IVP is tail heavy already -- no one wants to load extra weight = aft of the CG.
  C.  Challenged pilots should = perhaps fly a different plane.

I love the IVP = the way it is.  I have never crashed and died.  I understand = the envelope, and like = it;)

John

(On military = pilots and "training" to fly unstable air craft -- I don't think you are = accurate on this one.  The F-16 is so unstable that it requires 20+ = inputs per second to maintain straight and level flight.  It is = computerized.  No human being on earth, no matter how highly = trained, can manually fly an F-16 straight and level.  The "fly by = wire" F-16 is way easier to fly than my IVP.  The original side = stick didn't move at all, but responded to pressure.  Pilots hated = it so it was redesigned to move slightly.  And the pilots wishes to = go a computer that controls the flight surfaces.  There is no = direct manual connection from the stick to the flight control surfaces. =  Even in the old F4, the flight control "feel" was artificial -- = based on springs, as the hydraulic system supplied 3,000 psi to the = flight control surfaces, which came in really handy over about mach 1.1. =  You don't need a million dollars worth of training to fly a IVP = safely.  HPAT, yes.)

On Jun 24, 2011, at = 11:24 AM, Wolfgang wrote:

Military = aircraft are unstable to allow better agility.
Military pilots get over a million dollars = worth of training each to be able to handle their "unstable" = aircraft.
 
I = don't see that happening for IVP drivers.
 
There are a couple = of things that can be done that don't adversely affect performance or = handling.
Stall strips = and larger tail feathers come to = mind.
 
Wolfgang
 
<= tr>= <= /tbody>
From:John Hafen = <j.hafen@comcast.net>
Sender:<marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject:Airplane needs to be "fixed," Stall Speeds, Wing = Cuffs, Vortex Generators for L...
Date:Fri, 24 Jun = 2011 06:05:59 -0400
To:lml@lancaironline.net
Wolfgang states:  "If the airframe can't get = back in the envelope, then the airframe needs to be = fixed."

There are lots of = historical examples to the contrary, like the F4 Phantom.  Once in = a flat spin, the plane was unrecoverable from any altitude.  "Stick = Forward, Ailerons and Rudder Neutral, If not Recovered, Maintain Full = Forward Stick and Deploy Drag Shoot" were not enough. =  

Yet the F4 was the work horse fighter for the = Navy, Air Force, Marines, and hosts of allies for decades.  And it = was fast, over Mach II.

Yet, you stayed far far away from "departing" = -- high angle of attack, stick one way and the rudder the = other.....

Most advanced stalls in IVP are recoverable, = given 10,000 feet or so.

But unlike the F4, most of our IVPs are not = equipped with Martin-Baker ejection seats.

The F4 never got fixed.  The IVP got = "fixed."  It's called the "ES," with larger differently shaped = wings and fixed gear, that became the = Columbia/Cessna.

The "fix" was a series of tradeoffs that IMHO = made it a less desirable plane -- slower, fixed gear, = non-pressurized.

I'll happily keep the un-fixed version of the = IVP myself, thank you.  

John Hafen




On Jun 23, 2011, = at 9:11 AM, Wolfgang wrote:

I, for one, want to be able to recover from = an "adverse" condition should I ever find myself in = one.
Knowing where the = edges of the envelope are and how to get beck in the envelope should be = required.
If the = airframe can't get back in the envelope, then the airframe needs to be = fixed.
 
Wolfgang
----- = Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 = 2:12 PM
Subject: RE: [LML] Re: Stall Speeds, = Wing Cuffs, Vortex Generators for L...

David,

I= have no problem with anyone who wants to explore the =93envelope=94 of = his/her airplane. However, I take great exception to you grounding me = because I might choose to not get as near to the edge as you.

Lynn Farnsworth

Super Legacy #235

TSIO-550 Powered

Reno Race #44

Mmo .6

I agree 100% also.

If you don=92t know = what the incipient stall feels like in the stick and the airframe you = should not be flying the Legacy or 320=92s. 

(Not knowing this is = the single biggest killer of Lancair pilots.)

David T.

Legacy


= --Apple-Mail-117--68919481--