X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2011 08:13:17 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.67] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.0) with ESMTP id 5032480 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 25 Jun 2011 13:23:46 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.67; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=QUFUdo0pUAvnYNp3Uqg0zw/rCvr1bPtPTfM3C1UZn+wXNsLxd9KwDCoppeddO/uB; h=Received:From:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:To:References:Message-Id:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [64.223.166.158] (helo=[192.168.1.24]) by elasmtp-scoter.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1QaWZZ-00017U-9e for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 25 Jun 2011 13:23:09 -0400 From: Colyn Case Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-812-2907288 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Airplane needs to be "fixed," Stall Speeds, Wing Cuffs, Vortex Generators for L... X-Original-Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 13:23:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: X-Original-Message-Id: <74ECCD84-0B72-4578-98DF-EF2967E908C2@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-ELNK-Trace: 63d5d3452847f8b1d6dd28457998182d7e972de0d01da9404e71dd746f7e3605ebdff00625c86c7f350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 64.223.166.158 --Apple-Mail-812-2907288 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Jack, I know testing is required but I am curious what size and = incidence you have found most frequently works on a IV ? Colyn On Jun 25, 2011, at 12:35 PM, J H Webb wrote: > As someone who spent a great deal of time in low speed aerodynamics, = stalls in the LIV or other lancair models can be improved greatly with = the correct addition of Flow Strips (stall strips). They are not just = glue on and the stall is improved but when you correctly apply them the = stall will be improved (stall warning plus some prestall buffet) = significantly. This is normally done with only a 1 or 2 knot change in = stall speed. This normally will not affect the spin charastics.=20 >=20 > Jack Webb > L360, LIV > AeroSpace Engineer BSAE=20 > FAA Designated Check airman for C421, C404 & C310 > ATP, CFI Airplanes & Instruments, Multi, & Sea > Numerous Jet Type Ratings > Experienced Experimental Test Pilot both multi and single engine = aircraft > Former Chief Engineering Test Pilot for a Major Manufacturer >=20 > Ohio >=20 > From: John Hafen > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 11:02 PM > Subject: [LML] Re: Airplane needs to be "fixed," Stall Speeds, Wing = Cuffs, Vortex Generators for L... >=20 > One has to choose between stall strips and a heated leading edge. >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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. >=20 > I love the IVP the way it is. I have never crashed and died. I = understand the envelope, and like it;) >=20 > John >=20 > (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.) >=20 > On Jun 24, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Wolfgang wrote: >=20 > 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." >=20 > 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 >=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. >=20 > Yet, you stayed far far away from "departing" -- high angle of attack, = stick one way and the rudder the other..... >=20 > Most advanced stalls in IVP are recoverable, given 10,000 feet or so. >=20 > But unlike the F4, most of our IVPs are not equipped with Martin-Baker = ejection seats. >=20 > 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. >=20 > The "fix" was a series of tradeoffs that IMHO made it a less desirable = plane -- slower, fixed gear, non-pressurized. >=20 > I'll happily keep the un-fixed version of the IVP myself, thank you. =20= >=20 > John Hafen >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Jun 23, 2011, at 9:11 AM, Wolfgang wrote: >=20 > 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... >=20 > 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 >=20 >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-812-2907288 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Jack, = I know testing is required but I am curious what size and incidence you = have found most frequently works on a = IV
?

Colyn

On Jun = 25, 2011, at 12:35 PM, J H Webb wrote:

As someone who spent a = great deal of time in low speed aerodynamics, stalls in the LIV or other = lancair models can be improved greatly with the correct addition of Flow = Strips (stall strips). They are not just glue on and the stall is = improved but when you correctly apply them the stall will be improved = (stall warning plus some prestall buffet) significantly. This is = normally done with only a 1 or 2 knot change in stall speed. This = normally will not affect the spin charastics. =

Jack Webb
L360, LIV
AeroSpace Engineer BSAE
FAA Designated Check airman for C421, C404 & C310
ATP, CFI Airplanes & Instruments, Multi, & Sea
Numerous Jet Type Ratings
Experienced Experimental Test Pilot both multi and single engine = aircraft
Former Chief Engineering Test Pilot for a Major Manufacturer

Ohio

From: John Hafen <j.hafen@comcast.net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 = 11:02 PM
Subject: = [LML] Re: Airplane needs to be "fixed," Stall Speeds, Wing Cuffs, Vortex = Generators for L...

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-812-2907288--