X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 10:59:13 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nskntmtas06p.mx.bigpond.com ([61.9.168.152] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTP id 6014915 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 09:11:47 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=61.9.168.152; envelope-from=john@jjts.net.au Received: from nskntcmgw07p ([61.9.169.167]) by nskntmtas06p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20130116141110.FTQG10884.nskntmtas06p.mx.bigpond.com@nskntcmgw07p> for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:11:10 +0000 Received: from [192.168.15.18] ([110.142.219.220]) by nskntcmgw07p with BigPond Outbound id oeB71k00U4luXCm01eB8El; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 14:11:10 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=IccFqBWa c=1 sm=1 a=6xIvA0WTx9AVOJiHBW+VeQ==:17 a=D1PIhDlQBR8A:10 a=mCSqThwqAAAA:8 a=QkXBRyMHgwsA:10 a=HHGDD-5mAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=m2giflinAAAA:8 a=fLuM78UsAAAA:8 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=jjqUt_clAAAA:8 a=M4BZxJWWCdNw0nap4AMA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=rnYgdqcAs4AA:10 a=-ZBvsNeBbbMA:10 a=CVU0O5Kb7MsA:10 a=i1zE5R4R5dEA:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=3jk_M6PjnjYA:10 a=MSl-tDqOz04A:10 a=VsAc4WTjMo9oujSLFHsA:9 a=_W_S_7VecoQA:10 a=UPDw9W-J9MV1AmqA:21 a=6xIvA0WTx9AVOJiHBW+VeQ==:117 User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.5.121010 X-Original-Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:11:06 +0800 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Wing cuff videos From: John Smith X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List X-Original-Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [LML] Re: Wing cuff videos In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3441219069_4374102" > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3441219069_4374102 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable No prob; but these are not my work; these are the product of Lancair's test flying. They seemed, to me at least, to be a good demonstration of what these devices can do. Anyways, they were clearly not attempting to test th= e limits per that recent post about the "Cirrus crash analysis" where the unfortunate loss of flight control occurred with AoB up to 60deg and low power settings at about 200ft AGL. Regards, John =20 John N G Smith Tel / fax: +61-8-9385-8891 Mobile: +61-409-372-975 Email: john@jjts.net.au From: George Wehrung Reply-To: Lancair Mailing List Date: Wednesday, 16 January 2013 9:32 PM To: Subject: [LML] Re: Wing cuff videos > John, >=20 > Those are some pretty interesting stall series. Thanks for sharing the > videos. >=20 > George >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Jan 15, 2013, at 5:16 PM, John Smith wrote: >=20 >> George, and anyone else who wants to see these=8A Just send me a personal >> email at john@jjts.net.au - then I will be able to send you a Drop Box >> Invitation to share / access a directory with these wing cuff videos. [I >> tried to to this on the LML site, but doesn't seem to work=8A.sorry] >>=20 >>=20 >> Regards, >>=20 >> John >>=20 >> =20 >> John N G Smith >> Tel / fax: +61-8-9385-8891 >> Mobile: +61-409-372-975 >> Email: john@jjts.net.au >>=20 >>=20 >> From: George Wehrung >> Reply-To: Lancair Mailing List >> Date: Friday, 11 January 2013 1:01 AM >> To: >> Subject: [LML] Re: Stalls & Spins >>=20 >>> John, >>>=20 >>> It seems they have taken down the videos. >>>=20 >>> George >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On Jan 10, 2013, at 5:45 AM, John Smith wrote: >>>=20 >>>> Hi George, >>>>=20 >>>> I originally downloaded the videos from a link proved to me by Lancair= . >>>> I've been trying it (see below) but the link is not valid =AD so I'm gue= ssing >>>> the videos may have been removed. But have a try yourself =AD may work f= or >>>> you? I have the 5 videos (all of the Legacy FG) totalling 230MB. Not >>>> emailable =AD but I can upload them somewhere via FTP if you like =AD can = use >>>> Skype for this, or other tools like coreFTP etc=8A just let me know and = we'll >>>> make it happen somehow. >>>>=20 >>>> Below is what I was provided with in early 2009. >>>>=20 >>>> The cuffs improve the stall characteristics greatly. Take a look at t= he >>>> following: >>>> =20 >>>> www.lancair.com/legacy_cuff_test >>>> =20 >>>> Effectively, these tests are full aft stick limited deep stalls with f= laps >>>> up, take off, down, 30 degree bank, and power on. The tests were >>>> conducted in some pretty bumpy conditions. There was no more than 5 d= egree >>>> roll off without power and less than 10 degree roll off with power. >>>> =20 >>>> These tests were not conducted with the ventral. We are not looking t= o >>>> extend the rudder as of now. We are still investigating this though. >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Regards, >>>>=20 >>>> John >>>>=20 >>>> =20 >>>> John N G Smith >>>> Tel / fax: +61-8-9385-8891 >>>> Mobile: +61-409-372-975 >>>> Email: john@jjts.net.au >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> From: George Wehrung >>>> Reply-To: Lancair Mailing List >>>> Date: Tuesday, 8 January 2013 9:34 PM >>>> To: >>>> Subject: [LML] Re: Stalls & Spins >>>>=20 >>>>> John,=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> I would be interested in watching some of the videos on the ES in >>>>> particular if not the other airframes. Are they posted on the Interne= t by >>>>> chance, doubtful but I thought I'd ask. >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Jan 8, 2013, at 15:50, John Smith wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>>> From my perspective, the key phrase is spin resistance. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Having researched the NASA material and having also seen the Lancair >>>>>> videos of actual flight testing, rightly or wrongly, I installed the= wing >>>>>> cuffs to the Legacy on the basis that they seemed to offer the >>>>>> opportunity to make it harder to get into trouble, but accepting tha= t if >>>>>> pushed too far into a spin, then the aircraft may or may not be >>>>>> recoverable. So, if one accepts the view of many which is that "as w= as", >>>>>> the aircraft was not spin recoverable, there would only appear to be >>>>>> upside from installing the cuffs. The flaw is, of course, that if in= deed >>>>>> the Legacy is spin recoverable without wing cuffs, then the addition= of >>>>>> the wing cuffs may preclude spin recovery! >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Unless someone goes to the trouble of spin testing the Legacy, or an= y >>>>>> other type fitted with cuffs, one will never know whether spin recov= eries >>>>>> are possible under what flight and loading circumstances and, of cou= rse, >>>>>> with or without wing cuffs. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Meanwhile, per my prior post on this, all I can say is that the albe= it >>>>>> very limited flight testing (straight and level, and continuous 30de= g AoB >>>>>> turns) in my Legacy fitted with the cuffs shows that there is plenty= of >>>>>> warning of the impending stall =AD stall strips give the first "gentle= " >>>>>> warning", followed by the more severe intermittent "shuddering" as t= he >>>>>> centre section drops in and out of the stall (whilst the outboard >>>>>> sections are still flying). >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> I'm happy to talk to anyone if they are interested to talk about thi= s >>>>>> more=8A. numbers below, but please note time is UTC + 8!! >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> John >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> =20 >>>>>> John N G Smith >>>>>> Tel / fax: +61-8-9385-8891 >>>>>> Mobile: +61-409-372-975 >>>>>> Email: john@jjts.net.au >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> From: >>>>>> Reply-To: Lancair Mailing List >>>>>> Date: Tuesday, 8 January 2013 2:25 AM >>>>>> To: >>>>>> Subject: [LML] Re: Stalls & Spins >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Posted for "Peter Field" : >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Dear Lancair Drivers: >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> I've been following the discussion on stalls and spins and I want = to >>>>>>> add >>>>>>> some additional factual information purely for your personal >>>>>>> consumption and >>>>>>> reflection. Attached are excerpts from 10 different 1980-90 NASA >>>>>>> flight >>>>>>> test final reports on a series of GA airplanes in which NASA evalu= ated >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> use of cuffs on leading edges to improve the behavior of the test >>>>>>> airplane >>>>>>> approaching the stall. For various reasons the cuffs improved lat= eral >>>>>>> control entering the stall, but had the adverse effect of destabil= izing >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> aircraft once a fully developed spin was achieved. Essentially, s= tall >>>>>>> behavior was improved at the sacrifice of spin recovery. Cuffs on= wing >>>>>>> leading edges are an add on design fix, the more elegant solution = is >>>>>>> "washout," where the wing is twisted so the outer portions of the = wing >>>>>>> always operate at a lower angle of attack. >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> To my knowledge, Lancair has never subjected any of their aircraft= to a >>>>>>> fully developed spin matrix complete with appropriate instrumentat= ion >>>>>>> and a >>>>>>> spin recovery chute. There is no FAA requirement for them to do s= o - >>>>>>> it's >>>>>>> an Experimental Category airplane. Early on they may have lightly >>>>>>> touched >>>>>>> on such testing; but I have never seen any documentation on a full= y >>>>>>> completed spin matrix, which would involve at least 160 spins at >>>>>>> various >>>>>>> cg's and lateral loadings. In my opinion, it would be highly risk= y to >>>>>>> fool >>>>>>> around much beyond the stall in any Lancair - there is no document= ation >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> indicates any of these airplanes can always be recovered from a on= e >>>>>>> turn >>>>>>> incipient phase spin or any fully developed spin. Being good at s= pin >>>>>>> recovery isn't so much a matter of how skillful a pilot you are, i= t's a >>>>>>> matter of how many spins you've experienced in airplanes known to = be >>>>>>> recoverable. Being familiar with the stall characteristics of you= r own >>>>>>> airplane should be a matter of personal preference. >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> Pete Field (LNC2) >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> USNTPS graduate & spin recovery instructor >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>> -- For archives and unsub >>>>>>> http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html >>>=20 >=20 --B_3441219069_4374102 Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
No prob; but these= are not my work; these are the product of Lancair's test flying. They seeme= d, to me at least, to be a good demonstration of what these devices can do. =  Anyways, they were clearly not attempting to test the limits per that = recent post about the "Cirrus crash analysis" where the unfortunate loss of = flight control occurred with AoB up to 60deg and low power settings at about= 200ft AGL.

Regards,

John
John N G Smith
Tel / fax:    +61-8-9385-8891
Mobile:      +61-409-372-975
Email:         john@jjts.net.au
=

=
From= : George Wehrung <gw5@me.com><= br>Reply-To: Lancair Mailing List <= ;lml@lancaironline.net>
Date: Wednesday, 16 January 2013 9:32 PM=
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
Subject: [LML] Re: Wing cuff videos

John,
Those are some pretty interesting stall series.  Than= ks for sharing the videos.

George




On Jan 15, 2013, at 5:16= PM, John Smith <john@jjts.net.au&g= t; wrote:

john@jj= ts.net.au  - then I will be able to send you a Drop Box Invitation = to share / access a directory with these wing cuff videos. [I tried to to th= is on the LML site, but doesn't seem to work….sorry]


Regards,

John
John N G Smith
Tel / fax:    +61-8-9385-8891
Mobile:      +61-409-372-975
Email:         john@jjts.net.au


=
<= span style=3D"font-weight:bold">From: George Wehrung <gw5@me.com>
Reply-To= : Lancair Mailing List <lm= l@lancaironline.net>
Date: = Friday, 11 January 2013 1:01 AM
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>Subject: [LML] Re: Stalls & Spi= ns

John,

It seems they have taken down = the videos.

George




On Jan 10, 2013, at 5:45 AM, John Smith= <john@jjts.net.au> wrote:
=
Hi = George,

I originally downloaded the videos from a l= ink proved to me by Lancair. I've been trying it (see below) but the link is= not valid – so I'm guessing the videos may have been removed. But hav= e a try yourself – may work for you?  I have the 5 videos (all of= the Legacy FG) totalling 230MB. Not emailable – but I can upload them= somewhere via FTP if you like – can use Skype for this, or other tool= s like coreFTP etc… just let me know and we'll make it happen somehow.=

Below is what I was provided with in early 2009.

The cuffs= improve the stall characteristics greatly.  Take a look at the followi= ng:
 
 
Effectively, these tests are fu= ll aft stick limited deep stalls with flaps up, take off, down, 30 degree ba= nk,  and power on.  The tests were conducted in some pretty bumpy = conditions.  There was no more than 5 degree roll off without power and= less than 10 degree roll off with power.
 
These tests were not conducted with the vent= ral.  We are not looking to extend the rudder as of now.  We are s= till investigating this though.



Regards,

John
John N G Smith
Tel / fax:    +61-8-9385-8891
Mobile:      +61-409-372-975
Email:         john@jjts.net.au


=
<= span style=3D"font-weight:bold">From: George Wehrung <gw5@me.com>
Reply-To= : Lancair Mailing List <lm= l@lancaironline.net>
Date: = Tuesday, 8 January 2013 9:34 PM
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>Subject: [LML] Re: Stalls & Spi= ns

John, 

I would be interested in watc= hing some of the videos on the ES in particular if not the other airframes. = Are they posted on the Internet by chance, doubtful but I thought I'd ask.




Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 8, 2013, at 15:50, John Smith <john@jjts.net.au> wrote:

From my perspective, the key phrase is spin resistance.
<= div>
Having researched the NASA material and having also seen = the Lancair videos of actual flight testing, rightly or wrongly, I installed= the wing cuffs to the Legacy on the basis that they seemed to offer the opp= ortunity to make it harder to get into trouble, but accepting that if pushed= too far into a spin, then the aircraft may or may not be recoverable= . So, if one accepts the view of many which is that "as was", the aircraft w= as not spin recoverable, there would only appear to be upside from installin= g the cuffs. The flaw is, of course, that if indeed the Legacy is spin recov= erable without wing cuffs, then the addition of the wing cuffs may&nb= sp;preclude spin recovery!

Unless someone goes to t= he trouble of spin testing the Legacy, or any other type fitted with cuffs, = one will never know whether spin recoveries are possible under what flight a= nd loading circumstances and, of course, with or without wing cuffs.

Meanwhile, per my prior post on this, all I can say is tha= t the albeit very limited flight testing (straight and level, and continuous= 30deg AoB turns) in my Legacy fitted with the cuffs shows that there is ple= nty of warning of the impending stall – stall strips give the first "g= entle" warning", followed by the more severe intermittent "shuddering" as th= e centre section drops in and out of the stall (whilst the outboard sections= are still flying).

I'm happy to talk to anyone if = they are interested to talk about this more…. numbers below, but pleas= e note time is UTC + 8!!


Regards,

John
John N G Smith
Tel / fax:    +61-8-9385-8891
Mobile:      +61-409-372-975
Email:         john@jjts.net.au


=
<= span style=3D"font-weight:bold">From: <marv@lancair.net>
Reply-To: <= /span> Lancair Mailing List <lml@l= ancaironline.net>
Date: Tue= sday, 8 January 2013 2:25 AM
To: &= lt;lml>
Subject: [LML] Re: Stal= ls & Spins



Posted for "Peter Field" <pfield.avn@gmail.com>:

Dear Lancair Drivers:



I've been following the discussion= on stalls and spins and I want to add
some additional factual information purely for your personal consumption and
reflection. &= nbsp;Attached are excerpts from 10 different 1980-90 NASA flight
test final reports on a series of GA airplanes in which NASA evaluated the
u= se of cuffs on leading edges to improve the behavior of the test airplane
approaching the stall.  For various reasons the cuff= s improved lateral
control entering the stall, but had the adverse effect of destabilizing the
aircraft once a fully developed spin was ac= hieved.  Essentially, stall
behavior was improved at the sacrifice of spin recovery.  Cuffs on wing
leading edges are = an add on design fix, the more elegant solution is
"washout," where the wing is twisted so the outer portions of the wing
always operate at a l= ower angle of attack.



To my knowledge, Lancair has never subjected any of their aircraft to a
fully developed spin matrix comple= te with appropriate instrumentation and a
spin recovery chute.  There is no FAA requirement for them to do so - it's
= an Experimental Category airplane.  Early on they may have lightly touched
on such testing; but I have never seen any documentatio= n on a fully
completed spin matrix, which would involve at least 160 spins at various
cg's and lateral loadings.  In my opinion, i= t would be highly risky to fool
around much beyond the stall in any Lancair - there is no documentation that
indicates any of these airplan= es can always be recovered from a one turn
incipient phase spin or any fully developed spin.  Being good at spin
recovery isn't so m= uch a matter of how skillful a pilot you are, it's a
matter of how many spins you've experienced in airplanes known to be
recoverable. &nb= sp;Being familiar with the stall characteristics of your own
airplane should be a matter of personal preference.  



B= est regards,

Pete Field (LNC2)

USNTPS graduate & spin recovery instructor



-- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
<= br>

= --B_3441219069_4374102--