X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 08:33:48 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nm14-vm0.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com ([98.139.213.164] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0) with ESMTPS id 5953805 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 07:47:39 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=98.139.213.164; envelope-from=bu131@swbell.net Received: from [98.139.212.151] by nm14.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 17 Dec 2012 12:47:07 -0000 Received: from [98.136.87.60] by tm8.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 17 Dec 2012 12:47:07 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp123-mob.biz.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 17 Dec 2012 12:47:07 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 289874.43582.bm@smtp123-mob.biz.mail.ac4.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: PiRY4OgVM1lVk1fEyio1Dwc3LsyOTxkoyNf5D9pmYkNgacd b76fkO4BJW45Seg5geBQ4ydhKSqHlwfM59bWGKWeSc5H5n9.pVYHxToY_Va2 rTQPk3Z518eIM7BrYd9KGhOSc5NMoVpdmKAP_vxmKKxsO663kWKUgwUfvtHR ocDKH26NNLJZCSuy0BrWuDNcxZ2LCgAXnZfRcjlqxFDbb5yX6Yo51NrXkSIW TkCrG7VkiBPWIdvCsU2s697Lt5u7DghllP0950yb9BlGfsuPzPLjSmK7MtZj EXvSX3TZReZRQP6ZkHef1qtCtkOP.sNUHsMJw.i9gGUGUOSDQ12KG0Z2sV87 u2KE9r57XLlZC__ktkSqh9iELOMwRugsi.Tkk7DfeZ44A3svbN4wRvUtnD_S PUFYEJG6YKFQ49tHUkNI_dWKw9FSQe_V3um56FGYmEFm_c3s91sar7pObmTL chWrNJijbTUixVSa5N37ptZBUwOe3I2yoYyNaTLCJ2sTE2ZPjUfnZoz1vT6s MVd_LWpLvFGgglR30ujK2MaeawAT4hN2y8sDTksi6pQ-- X-Yahoo-SMTP: eERJTJCswBCu0l0QxPF_oyc3n8.DQSe28zFd2dc- Received: from [192.168.1.103] (bu131@99.181.53.104 with xymcookie) by smtp123-mob.biz.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with SMTP; 17 Dec 2012 04:47:07 -0800 PST Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Getting back into the air References: From: Andres Katz Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-15DC7332-AE26-492B-B003-EB1A050247B6 X-Mailer: iPad Mail (9B206) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Message-Id: X-Original-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 06:47:08 -0600 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) --Apple-Mail-15DC7332-AE26-492B-B003-EB1A050247B6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 After 600 hrs in mine which has a well calibrated AOA (3-4 kts above stall s= peed 76 kts!) I can feel the residual lift in the airplane, on final I maint= ain 90 which I know is excessive and if a short runway is ahead a long final= is called for a stable descent, then I bleed the extra lift by throttle and= keep an eye on the AOA I rarely look at the speeds in this phase the airpl= ane tells you, concur with fred that angle of attack is essential. At that h= igh angle of attack wings level 14 inches rpm close to the runway the airpl= ane behaves very well, lowering the nose takes the AOA warning off. Sent from my iPad On Dec 17, 2012, at 6:25 AM, Frederick Moreno w= rote: > Palo Alto was my home drome for 40 years before I left California 11 years= ago, and at the tail end of that time there was at least one Lancair IV bas= ed there, and several flew in and out regularly. They were early build, and= probably a lot lighter than later versions which I understand can go as hig= h 2500 pounds. I make no recommendations, merely observations. Pilot deci= des, as always. > =20 > Let me reiterate: I think a GOOD angle of attack indicator, carefully cali= brated, is mandatory for these airplanes. In my case I transition at about o= ne mile final and fly the AOA the rest of the way in except when it gets rea= l bumpy and the AOA is a bit jumpy. Then I use both, averaging the AOA and= then cross checking the air speed which is much slower and a better averagi= ng machine. But I would not do that on a short runway without a big head wi= nd. > =20 > Prudence has it own rewards. > =20 > Fred Moreno > =20 > =20 > =20 > =20 > -------Original Message------- > =20 > From: William A. Hogarty > Date: 17/12/2012 7:13:56 PM > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Subject: [LML] Re: Getting back into the air > =20 > Au Contraire, Mon Ami.. Palo Alto is NOT for the faint of heart in a IV-= P. =20 >=20 > Been there, done that, You have to be on top of your game or you end up o= n the overrun with smoking brakes and a red face (dont ask). >=20 > Why take a chance when you have so many suitable runways available in the i= mmediate vicinity????=20 >=20 > Is there something to prove? >=20 > Fly safe, Regards, Bill H. >=20 > . =20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Frederick Moreno wrote: > Hi John: > =20 > I originally flew off my Phase 1 off 3000 feet of dirt strip with no probl= ems, AFTER I based at the nearly big airport for the first ten hours to gain= landing skills. =20 > =20 > Lancair IVs operate out of Palo Alto without difficulty, 2500 feet.=20 > =20 > I hope you have an angle of attack indicator as it is extremely valuable f= or setting approach speeds which for my airplane vary from about 95 to 110 k= nots depending on weight. I routinely fly into a grass strip of 800 meters (= 2750 feet) with two people and half fuel. But you have to nail the numbers t= o prevent float, and once on the runway it just rolls, so lots of braking.=20= > =20 > Full disclosure: my airplane is not pressurized and has an empty weight o= f 1984 pounds.=20 > =20 > Fred=20 > =20 > =20 > =20 > =20 > -------Original Message------- > =20 > From: John Barrett > Date: 16/12/2012 2:57:21 AM > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Subject: [LML] Getting back into the air > =20 > My Lancair IVP after 55 hours of total flight time is having an engine ove= rhaul (it was a =E2=80=9Cnew engine=E2=80=9D to start with from Performance E= ngines =E2=80=93 I=E2=80=99ll tell that story later) and I expect to get the= engine back from Barrett in Tulsa in January or early February. It will ta= ke a while to get the engine back on =E2=80=93 all the other upgrades and fi= xes completed, taxi tests etc etc and so I expect to be ready to get airborn= e again in the spring or early summer. >=20 > =20 >=20 > I have about 60 hours of personal IVP time =E2=80=93 50 of them in my airp= lane. I am hangared at 0S9, Port Townsend International Airport in Washingt= on State.=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > The advice I=E2=80=99m looking for centers around the fact that our runway= is 3,000 feet long, certainly more than adequate for this airplane but not b= y a lot. The first flight after reinstallation will be a test flight with s= everal different concerns.=20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > 1. Although I have much confidence in my decision to have Barrett ov= erhaul the engine, it=E2=80=99s still a break in flight and carries more ris= k than normal for that first takeoff. >=20 > 2. Because I am still a low time LIV driver and I will have had almo= st 6 months of rust developing in my IVP skills, that will be a factor >=20 > 3. Because the airport environment is not conducive to emergency lan= ding after takeoff (trees and salt water at both ends) engine problems durin= g this takeoff would be problematic. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Port Angeles is about 6 or 7 minutes away in the IVP and has a nice long a= nd wide runway, so the plan is to head directly there and perform engine bre= ak in over head that airport followed by several landings there prior to ret= urning to home field. There is another runway at Sequim midway between that= is 4,000 ft long - it=E2=80=99s narrow but could be a satisfactory emergen= cy strip if necessary. >=20 > =20 >=20 > Is there advice other than hiring another test pilot and/or buying time in= someone else=E2=80=99s IVP that I should be planning for to lower risks in t= his upcoming event? Any other concerns I should be thinking about I haven=E2= =80=99t mentioned? >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > Regards, >=20 > =20 >=20 > John Barrett, CEO >=20 > Leading Edge Composites >=20 > PO Box 428 >=20 > Port Hadlock, WA 98339 >=20 > =20 >=20 > www.carbinge.com >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > =20 --Apple-Mail-15DC7332-AE26-492B-B003-EB1A050247B6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
After 600 hrs in mine whic= h has a well calibrated AOA (3-4 kts above stall speed 76 kts!) I can feel t= he residual lift in the airplane, on final I maintain 90 which I know is exc= essive and if a short runway is ahead a long final is called for a stable de= scent, then I bleed the extra lift by throttle and keep an eye on the AOA I r= arely look at the speeds  in this phase the airplane tells you, concur &= nbsp;with fred that angle of attack is essential. At that high angle of atta= ck  wings level 14 inches rpm close to the runway the airplane behaves v= ery well, lowering the nose takes the AOA warning off.

Sent from my i= Pad

On Dec 17, 2012, at 6:25 AM, Frederick Moreno <frederickmoreno@bigpond.com> wro= te:

Palo Alto was my home drome for 40 years before I left California 1= 1 years ago, and at the tail end of that time there was at least one Lancair= IV based there, and several flew in and out regularly.  They were earl= y build, and probably a lot lighter than later versions which I underst= and can go as high 2500 pounds.  I make no recommendations, merely obse= rvations.   Pilot decides, as always.
 
Let me reiterate: I think a GOOD angle of attack indicator, carefully c= alibrated, is mandatory for these airplanes.  In my case I transition a= t about one mile final and fly the AOA the rest of the way in except wh= en it gets real bumpy and the AOA is a bit jumpy.  Then I use both, ave= raging the  AOA and then cross checking the air speed which is much slo= wer and a better averaging machine.  But I would not do that on a short= runway without a big head wind.
 
Prudence has it own rewards.
 
Fred Moreno
 
 
 
 
= -------Original Message-------
 
Date: 17/12/2012 7:= 13:56 PM
Subject: [LML] Re: G= etting back into the air
 
Au Contraire, Mon Ami..   Palo Alto is NOT for the fai= nt of heart in a IV-P.  

Been there, done that,  You have to be on top of your game or you e= nd up on the overrun with smoking brakes and a red face (dont ask).

Why take a chance when you have so many suitable runways available in t= he immediate vicinity????  

Is there something to prove?

Fly safe,  Regards, Bill H.

.  



On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Frederick Moreno= <frederickmoreno@bigpond.com> wrote:
<= /tbody>
Hi  John:
 
I originally flew off my Phase 1 off 3000 feet of dirt strip with no pr= oblems, AFTER I based at the nearly big airport for the first ten hours to g= ain landing skills.   
 
 Lancair IVs operate out of Palo Alto without difficulty, 2500 fee= t. 
 
I  hope you have an angle of attack indicator as it is extremely v= aluable for setting approach speeds which for my airplane vary from about 95= to 110 knots depending on weight.  I routinely fly into a grass strip o= f 800 meters (2750 feet) with two people and half fuel.  But you h= ave to nail the numbers to prevent float, and once on the runway it just rol= ls, so lots of braking. 
 
 Full disclosure: my airplane is not pressurized and has an empty w= eight of 1984 pounds. 
 
Fred 
 
 
 
 
-------Original Message-------=
 
Date: 16/12/2012 2:= 57:21 AM
Subject: [LML] Gett= ing back into the air
 

My Lancair IVP after 55 hours of total flight time is= having an engine overhaul (it was a =E2=80=9Cnew engine=E2=80=9D to start w= ith from Performance Engines =E2=80=93 I=E2=80=99ll tell that story later) a= nd I expect to get the engine back from Barrett in Tulsa in January or early= February.  It will take a while to get the engine back on =E2=80=93 al= l the other upgrades and fixes completed, taxi tests etc etc and so I expect= to be ready to get airborne again in the spring or early summer.<= /u>

 

I have about 60 hours of personal IVP time =E2=80=93 5= 0 of them in my airplane.  I am hangared at 0S9, Port Townsend Internat= ional Airport in Washington State. 

 

The advice I=E2=80=99m looking for centers around the= fact that our runway is 3,000 feet long, certainly more than adequate for t= his airplane but not by a lot.  The first flight after reinstallation w= ill be a test flight with several different concerns. 

 

1.   &nb= sp;   Although I have much confidence in my decision= to have Barrett overhaul the engine, it=E2=80=99s still a break in flight a= nd carries more risk than normal for that first takeoff.

2.   &nb= sp;   Because I am still a low time LIV driver and I= will have had almost 6 months of rust developing in my IVP skills, that wil= l be a factor

3.   &nb= sp;   Because the airport environment is not conduci= ve to emergency landing after takeoff (trees and salt water at both ends) en= gine problems during this takeoff would be problematic.

 

Port Angeles is about 6 or 7 minutes away in the IVP a= nd has a nice long and wide runway, so the plan is to head directly there an= d perform engine break in over head that airport followed by several landing= s there prior to returning to home field.  There is another runway at S= equim midway between that is 4,000 ft long -  it=E2=80=99s narrow but c= ould be a satisfactory emergency strip if necessary.

 

Is there advice other than hiring another test pilot a= nd/or buying time in someone else=E2=80=99s IVP that I should be planning fo= r to lower risks in this upcoming event?  Any other concerns I should b= e thinking about I haven=E2=80=99t mentioned?

 

 

 

Regards,

 

John Barrett, CEO

Leading Edge Composites

PO Box 428

Port Hadlock, WA 98339

 

www.carbinge.com

 

 

 
= --Apple-Mail-15DC7332-AE26-492B-B003-EB1A050247B6--