Lightning-Archive.digest.vol-aw
July 25, 2008 - August 24, 2008
me aboard.=C2- The answer to your 51% rule question is still a bit "up in
the air" but we should have a better understanding of the new FAA proposal a
fter Oshkosh (I am there now).=C2- But reading their proposal, I think the
Lightning should be OK.=C2-=C2-Below is a summary of what the AOPA has
to say about the new proposal.=C2- We will get the EAA's take in=C2-seve
ral forums during the convention.
Blue Skies,
Buz Rich
=C2-
The FAA is scrutinizing =9Cfast build=9D homebuilt aircraft prog
rams and with that may come policy changes that affect future kit designs.
The FAA has released several draft documents to clarify the regulation of th
e homebuilt aircraft segment. The biggest potential change is to the definit
ion of the so-called 51-percent rule. The FAA=99s original intention w
as that the individual would fabricate more than 50 percent and assemble mor
e than 50 percent of the aircraft.
The FAA became concerned when fast-build kits entered the market where an ai
rcraft owner=99s contribution resulted in 51 percent of the assembly o
nly. The agency felt that this did not meet the intent of building
=9Csolely for their own education or recreation.0
The FAA now defines 51 percent as the builder completing, at a minimum, 20 p
ercent of the assembly and 20 percent of the fabrication with the remaining
11 percent made up from either additional assembly or fabrication. The FAA n
ow states that the commercial assistance or =9Cfor hire=9D build
ing programs will not count toward 20 percent of the assembly by the individ
ual.
The policy changes would not affect those flying traditionally certified air
craft or already completed amateur-built aircraft. Existing kit designs esse
ntially would be grandfathered, while new models, after the rules go into ef
fect, would get the extra scrutiny.
Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for FanHouse Fantasy Fo
otball today.
-= - The Lightning-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
-========================
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-============3D============
=========
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Colin J. Kennedy" <cjk129(at)cox.net> |
Buz,
I understand you have quoted the AOPA here, but are you getting the
impression that "Existing kit designs essentially would be
grandfathered" or
that "Existing kit designs, already on the FAA's 51% list, essentially
would
be grandfathered"?
In this case the difference could be critical because the Lightning is
not
already on the FAA's 51% list.
Colin K.
OK
Lightning # 52 under construction.
http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
n5pb(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
Buz,
This is good to know, especially since I begin my build in September at
SYI!
"Bear"
-----Original Message-----
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:16 am
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
Tim,
From one retired AF fighter pilot to another - welcome aboard. The
answer to your 51% rule question is still a bit "up in the air" but we
should have a better understanding of the new FAA proposal after Oshkosh
(I
am there now). But reading their proposal, I think the Lightning should
be
OK. Below is a summary of what the AOPA has to say about the new
proposal.
We will get the EAA's take in several forums during the convention.
Blue Skies,
Buz Rich
The FAA is scrutinizing "fast build" homebuilt aircraft programs and
with
that may come policy changes that affect future kit designs.
The FAA has released several
<http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/display_docs/index.cfm?Doc_Type=
Pubs
> draft documents to clarify the regulation of the homebuilt aircraft
segment. The biggest potential change is to the definition of the
so-called
51-percent rule. The FAA s original intention was that the individual
would
fabricate more than 50 percent and assemble more than 50 percent of the
aircraft.
The FAA became concerned when fast-build kits entered the market where
an
aircraft owner's contribution resulted in 51 percent of the assembly
only.
The agency felt that this did not meet the intent of building "solely
for
their own education or recreation."
The FAA now defines 51 percent as the builder completing, at a minimum,
20
percent of the assembly and 20 percent of the fabrication with the
remaining
11 percent made up from either additional assembly or fabrication. The
FAA
now states that the commercial assistance or "for hire" building
programs
will not count toward 20 percent of the assembly by the individual.
The policy changes would not affect those flying traditionally certified
aircraft or already completed amateur-built aircraft. Existing kit
designs
essentially would be grandfathered, while new models, after the rules go
into effect, would get the extra scrutiny.
_____
Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for FanHouse
Fantasy
Football today
<http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020> .
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
://forums.matronics.com
lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
======================
============
_____
The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser. Get the TMZ
Toolbar
Now
<http://toolbar.aol.com/tmz/download.html?NCID=aolcmp00050000000014> !
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
Hey Tim=2C
Good to have you onboard. I think that you'll find a lot of fellow air
force and/or government contract workers on here. Too bad that you sold t
he house in Hawaii=2C but if you can get a house in Tucson and a Lightning
that'd be pretty nice. Brian W.> Subject: Lightning-List: 51% Rule> From:
t_veeder(at)yahoo.com> Date: Fri=2C 25 Jul 2008 05:53:54 -0700> To: lightning-
veeder(at)yahoo.com>> > Hello Everyone=2C> > Been lurking here for the last se
veral months=2C listening to the chat. Retired from the AF last year (flew
F-4s=2C F-117s and F-16s) and was hired by a defense contractor here in Tuc
son. Took a demo ride in Greg Hobbs Lightning last Nov and have been lookin
g at my finances to try to squeeze money from the budget (just sold a house
in Hawaii and am looking to buy here in Tucson.) > > Anyway=2C enough abou
t me. What do you think the 51% ruling is going to do for/against the Light
ning? (I am hoping for!!)> Regards=2C> Tim Veeder> > --------> T Veeder> >
> > > Read this topic online here:> > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic
========================> _
====================> > >
_________________________________________________________________
With Windows Live for mobile=2C your contacts travel with you.
http://www.windowslive.com/mobile/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_mobile_
072008
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hugh Sontag <flying(at)qdea.com> |
I suspect "grandfathering" is more likely to apply to aircraft on the
FAA's list, not to any kit currently being produces.
I looked through that list, and I was surprised at how few aircraft
were on it, and how many were aircraft that no one would build today,
like the Cirrus VK-30.
The part that I've always had trouble sorting out is what the
percentage refers to.
It could be that a tail is considered to be 30% of the aircraft, so
if you "fabricated" the tail, you'd be done with the fabrication
requirement.
Is it percent of time, and if so, what time? A fuselage for a
Lightning takes only a very few hours to "fabricate" at the factory
once the molds have been built, so maybe it only contributes a few
hours to the total "fabrication and assembly time" for the aircraft.
If that's the case, the lower the total number of hours needed to
fabricate and assemble the factory-supplied parts, the fewer the
hours the amateur builder needs to put into the aircraft to meet the
51% rule.
That may be the saving grace for the Lightning, in that the nature of
an airplane built from composite molds is such that there aren't that
many total hours.
Hugh Sontag
>Buz,
>
>I understand you have quoted the AOPA here, but are you getting the
>impression that "Existing kit designs essentially would be
>grandfathered" or that "Existing kit designs, already on the FAA's
>51% list, essentially would be grandfathered"?
>
>In this case the difference could be critical because the Lightning
>is not already on the FAA's 51% list.
>
>
>Colin K.
>OK
>Lightning # 52 under construction.
><http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken>http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>n5pb(at)aol.com
>Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 5:08 PM
>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>
>Buz,
>This is good to know, especially since I begin my build in September at SYI!
>
>"Bear"
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:16 am
>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>
>Tim,
> From one retired AF fighter pilot to another - welcome aboard.
>The answer to your 51% rule question is still a bit "up in the air"
>but we should have a better understanding of the new FAA proposal
>after Oshkosh (I am there now). But reading their proposal, I think
>the Lightning should be OK. Below is a summary of what the AOPA has
>to say about the new proposal. We will get the EAA's take
>in several forums during the convention.
>Blue Skies,
>Buz Rich
>
>The FAA is scrutinizing "fast build" homebuilt aircraft programs and
>with that may come policy changes that affect future kit designs.
>The FAA has released several
><http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/display_docs/index.cfm?Doc_Type=Pubs>draft
>documents to clarify the regulation of the homebuilt aircraft
>segment. The biggest potential change is to the definition of the
>so-called 51-percent rule. The FAA s original intention was that the
>individual would fabricate more than 50 percent and assemble more
>than 50 percent of the aircraft.
>The FAA became concerned when fast-build kits entered the market
>where an aircraft owner's contribution resulted in 51 percent of the
>assembly only. The agency felt that this did not meet the intent of
>building "solely for their own education or recreation."
>The FAA now defines 51 percent as the builder completing, at a
>minimum, 20 percent of the assembly and 20 percent of the
>fabrication with the remaining 11 percent made up from either
>additional assembly or fabrication. The FAA now states that the
>commercial assistance or "for hire" building programs will not count
>toward 20 percent of the assembly by the individual.
>The policy changes would not affect those flying traditionally
>certified aircraft or already completed amateur-built aircraft.
>Existing kit designs essentially would be grandfathered, while new
>models, after the rules go into effect, would get the extra scrutiny.
>
>
>Get fantasy football with free live scoring.
><http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020>Sign
>up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
>
>
> target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>://forums.matronics.com
>lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>======================
>============
>
>
>The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser.
><http://toolbar.aol.com/tmz/download.html?NCID=aolcmp00050000000014>Get
>the TMZ Toolbar Now!
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
>
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
><http://www.matronics.com/contribution>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Colin J. Kennedy" <cjk129(at)cox.net> |
I like your thinking Hugh! :-)
Colin K.
OK
Lightning # 52 under construction.
http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hugh Sontag
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 8:27 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
I suspect "grandfathering" is more likely to apply to aircraft on the
FAA's list, not to any kit currently being produces.
I looked through that list, and I was surprised at how few aircraft
were on it, and how many were aircraft that no one would build today,
like the Cirrus VK-30.
The part that I've always had trouble sorting out is what the
percentage refers to.
It could be that a tail is considered to be 30% of the aircraft, so
if you "fabricated" the tail, you'd be done with the fabrication
requirement.
Is it percent of time, and if so, what time? A fuselage for a
Lightning takes only a very few hours to "fabricate" at the factory
once the molds have been built, so maybe it only contributes a few
hours to the total "fabrication and assembly time" for the aircraft.
If that's the case, the lower the total number of hours needed to
fabricate and assemble the factory-supplied parts, the fewer the
hours the amateur builder needs to put into the aircraft to meet the
51% rule.
That may be the saving grace for the Lightning, in that the nature of
an airplane built from composite molds is such that there aren't that
many total hours.
Hugh Sontag
>Buz,
>
>I understand you have quoted the AOPA here, but are you getting the
>impression that "Existing kit designs essentially would be
>grandfathered" or that "Existing kit designs, already on the FAA's
>51% list, essentially would be grandfathered"?
>
>In this case the difference could be critical because the Lightning
>is not already on the FAA's 51% list.
>
>
>Colin K.
>OK
>Lightning # 52 under construction.
><http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken>http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>n5pb(at)aol.com
>Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 5:08 PM
>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>
>Buz,
>This is good to know, especially since I begin my build in September at
>SYI!
>
>"Bear"
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:16 am
>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>
>Tim,
> From one retired AF fighter pilot to another - welcome aboard.
>The answer to your 51% rule question is still a bit "up in the air"
>but we should have a better understanding of the new FAA proposal
>after Oshkosh (I am there now). But reading their proposal, I think
>the Lightning should be OK. Below is a summary of what the AOPA has
>to say about the new proposal. We will get the EAA's take
>in several forums during the convention.
>Blue Skies,
>Buz Rich
>
>The FAA is scrutinizing "fast build" homebuilt aircraft programs and
>with that may come policy changes that affect future kit designs.
>The FAA has released several
><http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/display_docs/index.cfm?Doc_Type=Pub
s>draft
>documents to clarify the regulation of the homebuilt aircraft
>segment. The biggest potential change is to the definition of the
>so-called 51-percent rule. The FAA s original intention was that the
>individual would fabricate more than 50 percent and assemble more
>than 50 percent of the aircraft.
>The FAA became concerned when fast-build kits entered the market
>where an aircraft owner's contribution resulted in 51 percent of the
>assembly only. The agency felt that this did not meet the intent of
>building "solely for their own education or recreation."
>The FAA now defines 51 percent as the builder completing, at a
>minimum, 20 percent of the assembly and 20 percent of the
>fabrication with the remaining 11 percent made up from either
>additional assembly or fabrication. The FAA now states that the
>commercial assistance or "for hire" building programs will not count
>toward 20 percent of the assembly by the individual.
>The policy changes would not affect those flying traditionally
>certified aircraft or already completed amateur-built aircraft.
>Existing kit designs essentially would be grandfathered, while new
>models, after the rules go into effect, would get the extra scrutiny.
>
>
>Get fantasy football with free live scoring.
><http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020>Sign
>up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
>
>
> target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>://forums.matronics.com
>lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>======================
>============
>
>
>The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser.
><http://toolbar.aol.com/tmz/download.html?NCID=aolcmp00050000000014>Get
>the TMZ Toolbar Now!
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.mat
>ronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
>
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List>http://www.matronics
>.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
><http://www.matronics.com/contribution>http://www.matronics.com/contributio
n
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | N730AL Takes to the sky! |
After a series of low, then high speed taxi tests, at 12:30pm today,
Lightning #38 took to the sky here at Green Landings with Ryan Gross in the
cockpit. N730AL flew very well and straight with no abnormalities. Of
course there are going to be tweeks here and there, but Ryan was very
pleased with the flight, and I am VERY excited to get my airplane up in the
air.
The flight was about 15-20 minutes in duration and the Jabiru performed
great with expected temperatures during the flight.
I did take some video and will post it to my site in the next couple of
days.
Next up will be my opportunity to get some stick time in with my bird.
Jim Langley
www.jimslightning.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Colin J. Kennedy" <cjk129(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | N730AL Takes to the sky! |
Congratulations Jim!
You must be very excited to get behind the stick yourself and I am excited
to hear about it when you do.
Colin K.
OK
Lightning # 52 under construction.
http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim Langley
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 6:53 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: N730AL Takes to the sky!
After a series of low, then high speed taxi tests, at 12:30pm today,
Lightning #38 took to the sky here at Green Landings with Ryan Gross in the
cockpit. N730AL flew very well and straight with no abnormalities. Of
course there are going to be tweeks here and there, but Ryan was very
pleased with the flight, and I am VERY excited to get my airplane up in the
air.
The flight was about 15-20 minutes in duration and the Jabiru performed
great with expected temperatures during the flight.
I did take some video and will post it to my site in the next couple of
days.
Next up will be my opportunity to get some stick time in with my bird.
Jim Langley
www.jimslightning.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "JOSEPH MATHIAS LINDA MATHIAS" <lbmathias(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: N730AL Takes to the sky! |
Jim,
Congratulations on a big day! I know you are excited and anxious
to get behind the stick yourself; it will come soon and your careful
preparations will be rewarded!
Linda
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Langley
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 7:52 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: N730AL Takes to the sky!
After a series of low, then high speed taxi tests, at 12:30pm today,
Lightning #38 took to the sky here at Green Landings with Ryan Gross in
the cockpit. N730AL flew very well and straight with no abnormalities.
Of course there are going to be tweeks here and there, but Ryan was very
pleased with the flight, and I am VERY excited to get my airplane up in
the air.
The flight was about 15-20 minutes in duration and the Jabiru
performed great with expected temperatures during the flight.
I did take some video and will post it to my site in the next couple
of days.
Next up will be my opportunity to get some stick time in with my bird.
Jim Langley
www.jimslightning.com
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
7/26/2008 4:18 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: N730AL Takes to the sky! |
Sierra Hotel, Jim, Ryan, and all the Green Landing group. I know you are
excited and proud at the same time. When you get the chance send us a full
report for the newsletter.
Blue Skies,
Buz
PS: Are Ryan, Doug, and the GL gang coming up to OSH? Beautiful weather
today. The SYI bunch is here. Good party at Brennand airport last night
hosted by Tom and Al.
**************Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for
FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
(http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | N730AL Takes to the sky! |
Thanks everyone for the encouragement. I will document how I am proceeding.
This was a VERY cool day!
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of JOSEPH
MATHIAS LINDA MATHIAS
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: N730AL Takes to the sky!
Jim,
Congratulations on a big day! I know you are excited and anxious to
get behind the stick yourself; it will come soon and your careful
preparations will be rewarded!
Linda
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Langley <mailto:pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 7:52 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: N730AL Takes to the sky!
After a series of low, then high speed taxi tests, at 12:30pm today,
Lightning #38 took to the sky here at Green Landings with Ryan Gross in the
cockpit. N730AL flew very well and straight with no abnormalities. Of
course there are going to be tweeks here and there, but Ryan was very
pleased with the flight, and I am VERY excited to get my airplane up in the
air.
The flight was about 15-20 minutes in duration and the Jabiru performed
great with expected temperatures during the flight.
I did take some video and will post it to my site in the next couple of
days.
Next up will be my opportunity to get some stick time in with my bird.
Jim Langley
www.jimslightning.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
7/26/2008 4:18 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | N730AL Takes to the sky! |
I believe most of the GL group should be arriving tomorrow if not already
there. Ryan and Dean are flying out in Buddy Carlisle's Lightning and Jimmy
and Greg are coming in a Sky Ranger.
Jim!
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 9:29 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: N730AL Takes to the sky!
Sierra Hotel, Jim, Ryan, and all the Green Landing group. I know you are
excited and proud at the same time. When you get the chance send us a full
report for the newsletter.
Blue Skies,
Buz
PS: Are Ryan, Doug, and the GL gang coming up to OSH? Beautiful weather
today. The SYI bunch is here. Good party at Brennand airport last night
hosted by Tom and Al.
_____
Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up
<http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020> for
FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Lenox" <waynelenox(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: N730AL Takes to the sky! |
Jim
Congratulation on your first flight. Your will love it.
Wayne
-- "Jim Langley" wrote:
After a series of low, then high speed taxi tests, at 12:30pm today, Lig
htning #38 took to the sky here at Green Landings with Ryan Gross in the
cockpit. N730AL flew very well and straight with no abnormalities. Of
course there are going to be tweeks here and there, but Ryan was very p
leased with the flight, and I am VERY excited to get my airplane up in t
he air. The flight was about 15-20 minutes in duration and the Jabiru pe
rformed great with expected temperatures during the flight. I did take s
ome video and will post it to my site in the next couple of days. Next
up will be my opportunity to get some stick time in with my bird. Jim L
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
===============
____________________________________________________________
Click for free info on discount teaching degrees programs.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3njBiccDd4sfzpnaCjEeZU
meBYWXLlRjvKyvTocqIIa3du2v/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
Not sure what the status is, but like the great explorers before them,
Amelia, Charles, etc, the boys from Green Landings are making their way out
to Oshkosh, suffering the hardships of friendly taverns and good eating
along the way.
I'm surprised that the Skyranger is at the same stopover as the Lightning.
Ryan is usually flat out to wherever he is going!
Jim!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Getting there |
| From: | ryan(at)greenlandings.com |
Jim,
I am flying right now just over lake michigan. Not the heart of it but the shore
line. We are about 40 mins out from oshkosh.
Oh, your right I have been waiting hours on this skyranger all day. What a headwind.
Next year jim I hope your with us.
Ryan
-----Original Message-----
From: "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 18:14:13
Subject: Lightning-List: Getting there
This is a multipart message in MIME format.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Getting there |
| From: | ryan(at)greenlandings.com |
Jim,
I am flying right now just over lake michigan. Not the heart of it but the shore
line. We are about 40 mins out from oshkosh.
Oh, your right I have been waiting hours on this skyranger all day. What a headwind.
Next year jim I hope your with us.
Ryan
-----Original Message-----
From: "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 18:14:13
Subject: Lightning-List: Getting there
This is a multipart message in MIME format.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
Next year I will be there with you. Hopefully we will be flying a squadron
of Lightnings to the KOSH!
(Tell Jimmy to pick it up!)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jeynon" <jeynon2(at)verizon.net> |
After the great response I received on the prop hub question, I thought I would
try again with the prop itself. I'm using a wood Sensenich wood prop. To bolt
the prop to the hub the Jabiru manual calls for AN4-46A bolts with Belleville
washers and nylock nuts. The Sensenich installation manual calls for safety
wiring the bolts.
So, here are my questions.
I don't seem to find Belleville washers at the online aircraft supply stores.
Are they called something else?
Should I get bolts with pre-drilled heads and safety wire them?
I would think there is no point to drilling and wiring the nuts, as they could
not be re-torqued without replacing everything.
Is there anything else I should keep in mind?
Thanks in advance.
John Eynon
Lightning kit #53
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195559#195559
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Lenox" <waynelenox(at)juno.com> |
Jeynon
Just finished with my Lightning. I think we used AN5 bolts. washers an
d Nylock nuts. I did re- torque after 15 hrs. to 17 1/2 ft lbs.
Wayne
-- "jeynon" wrote:
After the great response I received on the prop hub question, I thought
I would try again with the prop itself. I'm using a wood Sensenich wood
prop. To bolt the prop to the hub the Jabiru manual calls for AN4-46A
bolts with Belleville washers and nylock nuts. The Sensenich installati
on manual calls for safety wiring the bolts.
So, here are my questions.
I don't seem to find Belleville washers at the online aircraft supply st
ores. Are they called something else?
Should I get bolts with pre-drilled heads and safety wire them?
I would think there is no point to drilling and wiring the nuts, as they
could not be re-torqued without replacing everything.
Is there anything else I should keep in mind?
Thanks in advance.
John Eynon
Lightning kit #53
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195559#195559
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
========================
===========
____________________________________________________________
No more waiting. Click now to experience the thrill of high speed Intern
et!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3nAYymyZuFiDYTfwBWQAs5
etUtoFTU6gcEggNPeIck8q6vqL/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jeynon" <jeynon2(at)verizon.net> |
I just checked whether AN5 bolts would fit, and while they will go through the
propeller (looks like the propeller could even take AN6) the mounting bushings
and plate are drilled for AN4.
John
[quote="Wayne Lenox"]
Just finished with my Lightning. I think we used AN5 bolts. washers and Nylock
nuts. I did re- torque after 15 hrs. to 17 1/2 ft lbs.
Wayne
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195612#195612
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com |
Yes John: I worked on my Lightning from the 7 th to the 18 th and put the
prop on either the 17 th or the 16 th. I had to drill out the mounting bushings
and the front plate to take the larger bolts. I do not remember what size I
drilled it out to. I recommend checking with Nick or Mark at Arion. (Yeah I
know, they are at Oshkosh.)
Lynn Nelsen Serial # 60.
In a message dated 7/29/2008 4:52:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
jeynon2(at)verizon.net writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "jeynon"
I just checked whether AN5 bolts would fit, and while they will go through
the propeller (looks like the propeller could even take AN6) the mounting
bushings and plate are drilled for AN4.
John
[quote="Wayne Lenox"]
Just finished with my Lightning. I think we used AN5 bolts. washers and
Nylock nuts. I did re- torque after 15 hrs. to 17 1/2 ft lbs.
Wayne
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195612#195612
**************Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for
FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
(http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Lightning Kitplanes Article |
All,
I have read the kitplanes article from the September 2008 issue. I haven't seen it on the shelves yet, but you can buy it pay per view here: http://www.kitplanes.com/issues/25_9/flight_reports/issues_flightreports_8344-1.phtml or if you're a geek like me you can get it now and then get the magazine when it comes out too! It is a great read that will show you some of the development of the safety, reliability, and feel.
The last one, although I have not gotten a chance to fly the latest verion of the
Lightning is a big one. I loved the only slightly positive pitch stability
of the original. I know that Buz and Nick felt the same way. This made it feel
a lot more like an aerobatic sportplane or a fighter. The change in feel
does make the plane much easier to fly, more forgiving, and eases the pilot workload.
The new engine mount moves the CG forward, improves feel and safety,
and in my opinion makes the plane look even better.
You'll notice that the guy who wrote the article had to get through to the current
demonstrator in improvements before he liked the handling. Everything else
he loved about the plane except pitch feel. I won't spoil the ending by telling
you what he thought about the new changes, but I will say this: the guy
was lucky enough to fly 3 Lightnings! I think he was just trying to get a little
extra free stick time personally ;-) Brian W.
_________________________________________________________________
Keep your kids safer online with Windows Live Family Safety.
http://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_family_safety_072008
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Lightning Kitplanes Article |
I have mixed emotions about the article. I tend to not enjoy articles as
much when the author has multiple opinions throughout. I also think he
should have done his review based on the current production model. If you
know you are going to write about the latest version, why comment in detail
about the older one?
I'll leave that where it lies and then add some additional thoughts later.
I don't want to ruin it for anyone either...
Jim!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Whittingham
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 6:40 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article
All,
I have read the kitplanes article from the September 2008 issue. I haven't
seen it on the shelves yet, but you can buy it pay per view here:
http://www.kitplanes.com/issues/25_9/flight_reports/issues_flightreports_834
4-1.phtml or if you're a geek like me you can get it now and then get the
magazine when it comes out too! It is a great read that will show you some
of the development of the safety, reliability, and feel.
The last one, although I have not gotten a chance to fly the latest verion
of the Lightning is a big one. I loved the only slightly positive pitch
stability of the original. I know that Buz and Nick felt the same way.
This made it feel a lot more like an aerobatic sportplane or a fighter. The
change in feel does make the plane much easier to fly, more forgiving, and
eases the pilot workload. The new engine mount moves the CG forward,
improves feel and safety, and in my opinion makes the plane look even
better.
You'll notice that the guy who wrote the article had to get through to the
current demonstrator in improvements before he liked the handling.
Everything else he loved about the plane except pitch feel. I won't spoil
the ending by telling you what he thought about the new changes, but I will
say this: the guy was lucky enough to fly 3 Lightnings! I think he was
just trying to get a little extra free stick time personally ;-) Brian W.
_________________________________________________________________
Keep your kids safer online with Windows Live Family Safety.
http://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_fam
ily_safety_072008
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Lightning Kitplanes Article |
Jim=2C
Similar feelings here=2C but still an interesting read and great publicit
y. Loved the pictures too! I used to live out by that lake they're flying
over. Everytime that we got ready to shoot air to air that's where we wen
t. Brian W.> From: pequeajim(at)gmail.com> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com>
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article> Date: Tue=2C 29 J
y" > > I have mixed emotions about the article. I tend
to not enjoy articles as> much when the author has multiple opinions throu
ghout. I also think he> should have done his review based on the current pr
oduction model. If you> know you are going to write about the latest versio
n=2C why comment in detail> about the older one? > > I'll leave that where
it lies and then add some additional thoughts later.> I don't want to ruin
it for anyone either...> > Jim!> > -----Original Message-----> From: owner-
lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@ma
tronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian> Whittingham> Sent: Tuesday=2C July 29=2C 2
008 6:40 PM> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com> Subject: Lightning-List: Lig
ttingham> > > > All=2C> > I have read the kitplanes ar
ticle from the September 2008 issue. I haven't> seen it on the shelves yet
=2C but you can buy it pay per view here:> http://www.kitplanes.com/issues/
25_9/flight_reports/issues_flightreports_834> 4-1.phtml or if you're a geek
like me you can get it now and then get the> magazine when it comes out to
o! It is a great read that will show you some> of the development of the sa
fety=2C reliability=2C and feel. > > The last one=2C although I have not go
tten a chance to fly the latest verion> of the Lightning is a big one. I lo
ved the only slightly positive pitch> stability of the original. I know tha
t Buz and Nick felt the same way.> This made it feel a lot more like an aer
obatic sportplane or a fighter. The> change in feel does make the plane muc
h easier to fly=2C more forgiving=2C and> eases the pilot workload. The new
engine mount moves the CG forward=2C> improves feel and safety=2C and in m
y opinion makes the plane look even> better. > > You'll notice that the guy
who wrote the article had to get through to the> current demonstrator in i
mprovements before he liked the handling.> Everything else he loved about t
he plane except pitch feel. I won't spoil> the ending by telling you what h
e thought about the new changes=2C but I will> say this: the guy was lucky
enough to fly 3 Lightnings! I think he was> just trying to get a little ext
ra free stick time personally =3B-) Brian W.> > ___________________________
______________________________________> Keep your kids safer online with Wi
ndows Live Family Safety.> http://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overvie
==> > >
_________________________________________________________________
Time for vacation? WIN what you need- enter now!
http://www.gowindowslive.com/summergiveaway/?ocid=tag_jlyhm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au> |
There was a discussion of this some time ago on the Jabiru engine list. See http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=37783
This talks about a source for washers here
http://www.mcmaster.com/
but I'm sure Arion, being Jab agents, could also supply.
The Jabiru assembly manual also has some words on the differences between Jabiru
and Sensenich prop mounting in their constructors manual here
http://www.jabiru.net.au/Manuals/Airframe%20Construction/Sections/Post-Paint_Fuselage_Engine_Fit%20propeller%20and%20spinner_JALL.pdf
As I understand it, the differences in securing methods between the two prop types
are largely driven by the Sensenich being built from harder timber than the
Jabiru.
It seems from the above that there are several methods which can be used to secure
the mount. If methods which secure the nut to the bolt, such as locknuts
or castlenuts, are not used then it is important that both ends of the fastener
are secured. That does mean that lockwire for example will have to be removed
each time the tension is to be checked.
Those of course are just my thoughts. The real wisdom on securing is in "the bible"
AC43-13-2B. Some good stuff on fasteners, nuts, lockwiring etc. in Ch 7
Cheers.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195665#195665
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Lightning Kitplanes Article |
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
How about a scan and E mail out a pdf for those of us that don't get the
mag across the pond...?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Whittingham
Sent: 30 July 2008 00:27
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article
Jim,
Similar feelings here, but still an interesting read and great
publicity. Loved the pictures too! I used to live out by that lake
they're flying over. Everytime that we got ready to shoot air to air
that's where we went. Brian W.
> From: pequeajim(at)gmail.com
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article
> Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:18:50 -0400
>
> -->
>
> I have mixed emotions about the article. I tend to not enjoy articles
> as much when the author has multiple opinions throughout. I also think
> he should have done his review based on the current production model.
> If you know you are going to write about the latest version, why
> comment in detail about the older one?
>
> I'll leave that where it lies and then add some additional thoughts
later.
> I don't want to ruin it for anyone either...
>
> Jim!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
> Whittingham
> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 6:40 PM
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article
>
>
>
>
> All,
>
> I have read the kitplanes article from the September 2008 issue. I
> haven't seen it on the shelves yet, but you can buy it pay per view
here:
> http://www.kitplanes.com/issues/25_9/flight_reports/issues_flightrepor
> ts_834 4-1.phtml or if you're a geek like me you can get it now and
> then get the magazine when it comes out too! It is a great read that
> will show you some of the development of the safety, reliability, and
> feel.
>
> The last one, although I have not gotten a chance to fly the latest
> verion of the Lightning is a big one. I loved the only slightly
> positive pitch stability of the original. I know that Buz and Nick
felt the same way.
> This made it feel a lot more like an aerobatic sportplane or a
> fighter. The change in feel does make the plane much easier to fly,
> more forgiving, and eases the pilot workload. The new engine mount
> moves the CG forward, improves feel and safety, and in my opinion
> makes the plane look even better.
>
> You'll notice that the guy who wrote the article had to get through to
> the current demonstrator in improvements before he liked the handling.
> Everything else he loved about the plane except pitch feel. I won't
> spoil the ending by telling you what he thought about the new changes,
> but I will say this: the guy was lucky enough to fly 3 Lightnings! I
> think he was just trying to get a little extra free stick time
personally ;-) Brian W.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Keep your kids safer online with Windows Live Family Safety.
> http://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_
> WL_fam
> ily_safety_072008
>
>
=======================
>
>
>
>
________________________________
Time for vacation? WIN what you need. Enter Now!
<http://www.gowindowslive.com/summergiveaway/?ocid=tag_jlyhm>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Lightning Kitplanes Article |
I think that it would raise legal issues to copy a current magazine article
for mass distribution when Kitplanes is trying to sale it. You can always
go to that link that I sent out though and buy a .PDF version even if you
are overseas. Brian W.> Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes A
rticle> Date: Wed=2C 30 Jul 2008 10:45:30 +0100> From: clive.james(at)uk.bp.co
m> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com> > --> Lightning-List message posted by
: "James=2C Clive R" > > How about a scan and E mail
out a pdf for those of us that don't get the> mag across the pond...? > >
-----Original Message-----> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian> Wh
ittingham> Sent: 30 July 2008 00:27> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com> Subj
ect: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article> > Jim=2C> Similar fee
lings here=2C but still an interesting read and great> publicity. Loved the
pictures too! I used to live out by that lake> they're flying over. Everyt
ime that we got ready to shoot air to air> that's where we went. Brian W.>
> > From: pequeajim(at)gmail.com> > To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com> > Subjec
t: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article> > Date: Tue=2C 29 Jul 2
y" > > --> > > > > I have mixed emotions about the art
icle. I tend to not enjoy articles > > as much when the author has multiple
opinions throughout. I also think> > > he should have done his review base
d on the current production model. > > If you know you are going to write a
bout the latest version=2C why > > comment in detail about the older one?>
> > > I'll leave that where it lies and then add some additional thoughts>
later.> > I don't want to ruin it for anyone either...> > > > Jim!> > > > -
----Original Message-----> > From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.co
m> > [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
> > Whittingham> > Sent: Tuesday=2C July 29=2C 2008 6:40 PM> > To: lightnin
g-list(at)matronics.com> > Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Articl
i(at)hotmail.com>> > > > > > All=2C> > > > I have read the kitplanes article f
rom the September 2008 issue. I > > haven't seen it on the shelves yet=2C b
ut you can buy it pay per view> here:> > http://www.kitplanes.com/issues/25
_9/flight_reports/issues_flightrepor> > ts_834 4-1.phtml or if you're a gee
k like me you can get it now and > > then get the magazine when it comes ou
t too! It is a great read that > > will show you some of the development of
the safety=2C reliability=2C and > > feel.> > > > The last one=2C although
I have not gotten a chance to fly the latest > > verion of the Lightning i
s a big one. I loved the only slightly > > positive pitch stability of the
original. I know that Buz and Nick> felt the same way.> > This made it feel
a lot more like an aerobatic sportplane or a > > fighter. The change in fe
el does make the plane much easier to fly=2C > > more forgiving=2C and ease
s the pilot workload. The new engine mount > > moves the CG forward=2C impr
oves feel and safety=2C and in my opinion > > makes the plane look even bet
ter.> > > > You'll notice that the guy who wrote the article had to get thr
ough to> > > the current demonstrator in improvements before he liked the h
andling.> > Everything else he loved about the plane except pitch feel. I w
on't > > spoil the ending by telling you what he thought about the new chan
ges=2C> > > but I will say this: the guy was lucky enough to fly 3 Lightnin
gs! I > > think he was just trying to get a little extra free stick time> p
ersonally =3B-) Brian W.> > > > ___________________________________________
______________________> > Keep your kids safer online with Windows Live Fam
ily Safety.> > http://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overview.html?ocid
=TXT_TAGLM_> > WL_fam> > ily_safety_072008> > > > > =======
=================> > >=> > > > > > > >
> > ________________________________> > Time for vacation? WIN what you nee
d. Enter Now!> <http://www.gowindowslive.com/summergiveaway/?ocid=tag_jly
==========> > >
_________________________________________________________________
With Windows Live for mobile=2C your contacts travel with you.
http://www.windowslive.com/mobile/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_mobile_
072008
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Lightning Kitplanes Article |
Having read both the draft article and now the final as it is published in
the magazine, I think overall it is an overall good write up. However,
without getting into a long discussion in this email, the writer, a good guy that
has a great background in aviation, still thinks that the main reason the
latest demo shows positive stability is the CG. Even though both Nick and I
spend hours telling him why the previous bungee trim system was what made the
original Lightning (and Esqual) fly like they were neutral to slightly unstabel
in pitch, he still thinks it was a CG issue. Note, the three Lightnings he
flew were within a "hair" of being at exactly at the same CG. I may get into
a longer explanation in a future newsletter, but for now, just let me say
that the new trim system is what made the difference and I highly recommend that
flying Lightnings upgrade to that system.
As an Oshkosh update, we have four Lightnings here - the factory demo, Tom
and Al's Wisconsin demo, Buddy's Green Landings Special that Ryan brought up,
and once again Bill Hubbard's "jet". Remember, Bill was the first to fly a
customer completed Lightning to OSH last year. This Friday will be the
Lightning forum and then the Lightning get together at their booth after the forum.
Blue Skies,
Buz
**************Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for
FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
(http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "jhausch" <jhausch(at)charter.net> |
I shared these comments in the EAA tent at Osh yesterday, but I want to repeat
here for the comment of others:
It looks like the level of completion and lack of overall builder performed glass/composite
work on the Lightning might be a problem with the latest interpretation
of the 51% rule.
I would suggest, as an alternative to providing components of the kit in a "less
complete" format, that the FAA allow a builder to demonstrate glass/composite
construction skills on a part which does not become part of the final aircraft.
I'd gladly build a small and simple mold; lay in gelcoat, glass, resin, etc; remove
and trim; attach a bracket; etc etc.
This would demonstrate to the FAA that I had the experience to work on this glass
kit, but it would not require me to have large molds to do so.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195758#195758
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sales Email Account <sales(at)billandruth.net> |
Hello All,
I just reviewed Van's quick build kits and I see very little difference
between their state of completion and that of the delivered Arion Kit.
It seems to me the Lightning should have little difficulty in
demonstrating that we indeed built "51%" of our kit.
However, what if the FAA says that the kit does not meet the "51%"
intent of the rule, what then?????
Bill Applegate, Tucson, AZ with kit #49.
jhausch wrote:
>
>I shared these comments in the EAA tent at Osh yesterday, but I want to repeat
here for the comment of others:
>
>It looks like the level of completion and lack of overall builder performed glass/composite
work on the Lightning might be a problem with the latest interpretation
of the 51% rule.
>
>I would suggest, as an alternative to providing components of the kit in a "less
complete" format, that the FAA allow a builder to demonstrate glass/composite
construction skills on a part which does not become part of the final aircraft.
>
>I'd gladly build a small and simple mold; lay in gelcoat, glass, resin, etc; remove
and trim; attach a bracket; etc etc.
>
>This would demonstrate to the FAA that I had the experience to work on this glass
kit, but it would not require me to have large molds to do so.
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195758#195758
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com |
Hey Bill: I agree that we may have a problem. With all the changes in
fabrication techniques between glass and aluminum, it is difficult to prove the
51%
rule. I must admit that I could not believe how easy it was to work with
fiberglass, compared to aluminum. I think the real effort must be shown in the
difference in the materials and applications. IF, and I think that is a big IF,
the FAA (I use that term loosely because it all depends on the individual
doing the evaluation) can be shown the ease of operation/application I think it
can be shown that the completion of the kit will fall within the 20%
indicated in their press release.
>> To ensure consistency and standardization concerning amateur-built
kit aircraft evaluations, the FAA proposes to clarify how much
fabrication and assembly must be performed by the amateur builder. The
FAA is proposing that an amateur builder fabricate a minimum of 20
percent of an aircraft and assemble a minimum of 20 percent of the
aircraft. The FAA also clarifies the role of commercial assistance,
which includes both the pre-fabrication of parts and direct assistance
to the builder, as part of the remaining 49 percent (manufacturer and
commercial assistance). <<
Lynn Nelsen
**************Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for
FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
(http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
The prop guide bushings must be drilled out, we use a 3/8" bit and so does
the aluminum crush plate.
Nick Otterback
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jeynon
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 3:50 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Prop bolts
I just checked whether AN5 bolts would fit, and while they will go through
the propeller (looks like the propeller could even take AN6) the mounting
bushings and plate are drilled for AN4.
John
[quote="Wayne Lenox"]
Just finished with my Lightning. I think we used AN5 bolts. washers and
Nylock nuts. I did re- torque after 15 hrs. to 17 1/2 ft lbs.
Wayne
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195612#195612
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
Bolts with a lightning and wood sensensich prop should be AN6-45A nylocs
bellvills and std washers if needed.
Nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wayne Lenox
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Prop bolts
Jeynon
Just finished with my Lightning. I think we used AN5 bolts. washers and
Nylock nuts. I did re- torque after 15 hrs. to 17 1/2 ft lbs.
Wayne
-- "jeynon" wrote:
After the great response I received on the prop hub question, I thought I
would try again with the prop itself. I'm using a wood Sensenich wood prop.
To bolt the prop to the hub the Jabiru manual calls for AN4-46A bolts with
Belleville washers and nylock nuts. The Sensenich installation manual calls
for safety wiring the bolts.
So, here are my questions.
I don't seem to find Belleville washers at the online aircraft supply
stores. Are they called something else?
Should I get bolts with pre-drilled heads and safety wire them?
I would think there is no point to drilling and wiring the nuts, as they
could not be re-torqued without replacing everything.
Is there anything else I should keep in mind?
Thanks in advance.
John Eynon
Lightning kit #53
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.=====================================
==========================================================; -
MATRONICS WEB F================================================nbsp;
&===============================================
____________________________________________________________
No more waiting. Click now to experience the thrill of high
<http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2142/fc/Ioyw6i3nAYymyZuFiDYTfwBWQAs5etU
toFTU6gcEggNPeIck8q6vqL/> speed Internet!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
John,
We have prop bolts kits available if you would like one....
Nick Otterback
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jeynon
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 10:37 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Prop bolts
After the great response I received on the prop hub question, I thought I
would try again with the prop itself. I'm using a wood Sensenich wood prop.
To bolt the prop to the hub the Jabiru manual calls for AN4-46A bolts with
Belleville washers and nylock nuts. The Sensenich installation manual calls
for safety wiring the bolts.
So, here are my questions.
I don't seem to find Belleville washers at the online aircraft supply
stores. Are they called something else?
Should I get bolts with pre-drilled heads and safety wire them?
I would think there is no point to drilling and wiring the nuts, as they
could not be re-torqued without replacing everything.
Is there anything else I should keep in mind?
Thanks in advance.
John Eynon
Lightning kit #53
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195559#195559
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
To Group,
Arion aircraft will post a longer more detailed read in the next news
letter, but here are a few thoughts. First the "approved" list is not a
prerequisite for and EAB inspection or certificate, it only makes the DARs
job easier in determining who did the major portion of the work. With this
in mind keep very detailed builders logs of what you are doing why and how
and you will not have a problem. This was discussed in length at several
forums at EAA (forgive me if I do not call it Airventure) and this was the
general consensus. There is nothing wrong with the current rule however
determining major portion and how to enforce it has loosened. This is the
focus and it was made clear that those building aircraft at home weather on
the list or not, if showing proof thru builders logs or photos and notes
would not have a problem showing that they did the work and would not have a
problem receiving there AWCs. The FAA has extended the comment period for
the proposed policy, This is key, it is a policy and not a rule, they do not
even have to show it to us if they want, but they are. So email
miguel.vasconcelos(at)faa.gov with your comments. Please do not send screamers.
They will not listen to them and they made that very clear. When sending a
comment make it clear what you think is wrong and than propose how it could
be fixed or adjusted this is what they want to see. It is our privilege to
build these aircraft at home and it is our job to help the FAA understand
that and keep it alive.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hugh Sontag
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 8:27 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
I suspect "grandfathering" is more likely to apply to aircraft on the
FAA's list, not to any kit currently being produces.
I looked through that list, and I was surprised at how few aircraft
were on it, and how many were aircraft that no one would build today,
like the Cirrus VK-30.
The part that I've always had trouble sorting out is what the
percentage refers to.
It could be that a tail is considered to be 30% of the aircraft, so
if you "fabricated" the tail, you'd be done with the fabrication
requirement.
Is it percent of time, and if so, what time? A fuselage for a
Lightning takes only a very few hours to "fabricate" at the factory
once the molds have been built, so maybe it only contributes a few
hours to the total "fabrication and assembly time" for the aircraft.
If that's the case, the lower the total number of hours needed to
fabricate and assemble the factory-supplied parts, the fewer the
hours the amateur builder needs to put into the aircraft to meet the
51% rule.
That may be the saving grace for the Lightning, in that the nature of
an airplane built from composite molds is such that there aren't that
many total hours.
Hugh Sontag
>Buz,
>
>I understand you have quoted the AOPA here, but are you getting the
>impression that "Existing kit designs essentially would be
>grandfathered" or that "Existing kit designs, already on the FAA's
>51% list, essentially would be grandfathered"?
>
>In this case the difference could be critical because the Lightning
>is not already on the FAA's 51% list.
>
>
>Colin K.
>OK
>Lightning # 52 under construction.
><http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken>http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>n5pb(at)aol.com
>Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 5:08 PM
>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>
>Buz,
>This is good to know, especially since I begin my build in September at
SYI!
>
>"Bear"
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:16 am
>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>
>Tim,
> From one retired AF fighter pilot to another - welcome aboard.
>The answer to your 51% rule question is still a bit "up in the air"
>but we should have a better understanding of the new FAA proposal
>after Oshkosh (I am there now). But reading their proposal, I think
>the Lightning should be OK. Below is a summary of what the AOPA has
>to say about the new proposal. We will get the EAA's take
>in several forums during the convention.
>Blue Skies,
>Buz Rich
>
>The FAA is scrutinizing "fast build" homebuilt aircraft programs and
>with that may come policy changes that affect future kit designs.
>The FAA has released several
><http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/display_docs/index.cfm?Doc_Type=Pub
s>draft
>documents to clarify the regulation of the homebuilt aircraft
>segment. The biggest potential change is to the definition of the
>so-called 51-percent rule. The FAA s original intention was that the
>individual would fabricate more than 50 percent and assemble more
>than 50 percent of the aircraft.
>The FAA became concerned when fast-build kits entered the market
>where an aircraft owner's contribution resulted in 51 percent of the
>assembly only. The agency felt that this did not meet the intent of
>building "solely for their own education or recreation."
>The FAA now defines 51 percent as the builder completing, at a
>minimum, 20 percent of the assembly and 20 percent of the
>fabrication with the remaining 11 percent made up from either
>additional assembly or fabrication. The FAA now states that the
>commercial assistance or "for hire" building programs will not count
>toward 20 percent of the assembly by the individual.
>The policy changes would not affect those flying traditionally
>certified aircraft or already completed amateur-built aircraft.
>Existing kit designs essentially would be grandfathered, while new
>models, after the rules go into effect, would get the extra scrutiny.
>
>
>Get fantasy football with free live scoring.
><http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020>Sign
>up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
>
>
> target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>://forums.matronics.com
>lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>======================
>============
>
>
>The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser.
><http://toolbar.aol.com/tmz/download.html?NCID=aolcmp00050000000014>Get
>the TMZ Toolbar Now!
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matroni
cs.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
>
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List>http://www.matronics.com
/Navigator?Lightning-List
><http://www.matronics.com/contribution>http://www.matronics.com/contributio
n
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | : Lightning-List |
Hey Nick: I know it is none of my business, but did you have a good show and
sell lots of Lightnings? I hope you did. Do you have any idea when N13LN
might make its first flight?
Lynn
In a message dated 8/5/2008 9:37:47 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
info(at)flylightning.net writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "flylightning"
To Group,
Arion aircraft will post a longer more detailed read in the next news
letter, but here are a few thoughts. First the "approved" list is not a
prerequisite for and EAB inspection or certificate, it only makes the DARs
job easier in determining who did the major portion of the work. With this
in mind keep very detailed builders logs of what you are doing why and how
and you will not have a problem. This was discussed in length at several
forums at EAA (forgive me if I do not call it Airventure) and this was the
general consensus. There is nothing wrong with the current rule however
determining major portion and how to enforce it has loosened. This is the
focus and it was made clear that those building aircraft at home weather on
the list or not, if showing proof thru builders logs or photos and notes
would not have a problem showing that they did the work and would not have a
problem receiving there AWCs. The FAA has extended the comment period for
the proposed policy, This is key, it is a policy and not a rule, they do not
even have to show it to us if they want, but they are. So email
miguel.vasconcelos(at)faa.gov with your comments. Please do not send screamers.
They will not listen to them and they made that very clear. When sending a
comment make it clear what you think is wrong and than propose how it could
be fixed or adjusted this is what they want to see. It is our privilege to
build these aircraft at home and it is our job to help the FAA understand
that and keep it alive.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hugh Sontag
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 8:27 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
I suspect "grandfathering" is more likely to apply to aircraft on the
FAA's list, not to any kit currently being produces.
I looked through that list, and I was surprised at how few aircraft
were on it, and how many were aircraft that no one would build today,
like the Cirrus VK-30.
The part that I've always had trouble sorting out is what the
percentage refers to.
It could be that a tail is considered to be 30% of the aircraft, so
if you "fabricated" the tail, you'd be done with the fabrication
requirement.
Is it percent of time, and if so, what time? A fuselage for a
Lightning takes only a very few hours to "fabricate" at the factory
once the molds have been built, so maybe it only contributes a few
hours to the total "fabrication and assembly time" for the aircraft.
If that's the case, the lower the total number of hours needed to
fabricate and assemble the factory-supplied parts, the fewer the
hours the amateur builder needs to put into the aircraft to meet the
51% rule.
That may be the saving grace for the Lightning, in that the nature of
an airplane built from composite molds is such that there aren't that
many total hours.
Hugh Sontag
>Buz,
>
>I understand you have quoted the AOPA here, but are you getting the
>impression that "Existing kit designs essentially would be
>grandfathered" or that "Existing kit designs, already on the FAA's
>51% list, essentially would be grandfathered"?
>
>In this case the difference could be critical because the Lightning
>is not already on the FAA's 51% list.
>
>
>Colin K.
>OK
>Lightning # 52 under construction.
><http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken>http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>n5pb(at)aol.com
>Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 5:08 PM
>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>
>Buz,
>This is good to know, especially since I begin my build in September at
SYI!
>
>"Bear"
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:16 am
>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>
>Tim,
> From one retired AF fighter pilot to another - welcome aboard.
>The answer to your 51% rule question is still a bit "up in the air"
>but we should have a better understanding of the new FAA proposal
>after Oshkosh (I am there now). But reading their proposal, I think
>the Lightning should be OK. Below is a summary of what the AOPA has
>to say about the new proposal. We will get the EAA's take
>in several forums during the convention.
>Blue Skies,
>Buz Rich
>
>The FAA is scrutinizing "fast build" homebuilt aircraft programs and
>with that may come policy changes that affect future kit designs.
>The FAA has released several
><http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/display_docs/index.cfm?Doc_Type=Pub
s>draft
>documents to clarify the regulation of the homebuilt aircraft
>segment. The biggest potential change is to the definition of the
>so-called 51-percent rule. The FAA s original intention was that the
>individual would fabricate more than 50 percent and assemble more
>than 50 percent of the aircraft.
>The FAA became concerned when fast-build kits entered the market
>where an aircraft owner's contribution resulted in 51 percent of the
>assembly only. The agency felt that this did not meet the intent of
>building "solely for their own education or recreation."
>The FAA now defines 51 percent as the builder completing, at a
>minimum, 20 percent of the assembly and 20 percent of the
>fabrication with the remaining 11 percent made up from either
>additional assembly or fabrication. The FAA now states that the
>commercial assistance or "for hire" building programs will not count
>toward 20 percent of the assembly by the individual.
>The policy changes would not affect those flying traditionally
>certified aircraft or already completed amateur-built aircraft.
>Existing kit designs essentially would be grandfathered, while new
>models, after the rules go into effect, would get the extra scrutiny.
>
>
>Get fantasy football with free live scoring.
><http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020>Sign
>up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
>
>
> target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>://forums.matronics.com
>lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>======================
>============
>
>
>The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser.
><http://toolbar.aol.com/tmz/download.html?NCID=aolcmp00050000000014>Get
>the TMZ Toolbar Now!
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matroni
cs.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
>
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List>http://www.matronics.com
/Navigator?Lightning-List
><http://www.matronics.com/contribution>http://www.matronics.com/contributio
n
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
| Subject: | : Lightning-List |
Lynn,
The show was busy lots of interest. I sloshed the tank last week once and I
am going to do it again this afternoon, so 2 cotes. I will check for leaks
on Wednesday, if no leaks we will get it back together. I should be able to
fly next week. I would fly this week but I am leaving for Thursday and
Friday and wont be around to fly. The rest of the crew is gone today and
tomorrow so not much help here. They are coming back end of this week.
Nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 11:46 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: : Lightning-List
Hey Nick: I know it is none of my business, but did you have a good show and
sell lots of Lightnings? I hope you did. Do you have any idea when N13LN
might make its first flight?
Lynn
In a message dated 8/5/2008 9:37:47 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
info(at)flylightning.net writes:
To Group,
Arion aircraft will post a longer more detailed read in the next news
letter, but here are a few thoughts. First the "approved" list is not a
prerequisite for and EAB inspection or certificate, it only makes the DARs
job easier in determining who did the major portion of the work. With this
in mind keep very detailed builders logs of what you are doing why and how
and you will not have a problem. This was discussed in length at several
forums at EAA (forgive me if I do not call it Airventure) and this was the
general consensus. There is nothing wrong with the current rule however
determining major portion and how to enforce it has loosened. This is the
focus and it was made clear that those building aircraft at home weather on
the list or not, if showing proof thru builders logs or photos and notes
would not have a problem showing that they did the work and would not have a
problem receiving there AWCs. The FAA has extended the comment period for
the proposed policy, This is key, it is a policy and not a rule, they do not
even have to show it to us if they want, but they are. So email
miguel.vasconcelos(at)faa.gov with your comments. Please do not send screamers.
They will not listen to them and they made that very clear. When sending a
comment make it clear what you think is wrong and than propose how it could
be fixed or adjusted this is what they want to see. It is our privilege to
build these aircraft at home and it is our job to help the FAA understand
that and keep it alive.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hugh Sontag
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 8:27 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
I suspect "grandfathering" is more likely to apply to aircraft on the
FAA's list, not to any kit currently being produces.
I looked through that list, and I was surprised at how few aircraft
were on it, and how many were aircraft that no one would build today,
like the Cirrus VK-30.
The part that I've always had trouble sorting out is what the
percentage refers to.
It could be that a tail is considered to be 30% of the aircraft, so
if you "fabricated" the tail, you'd be done with the fabrication
requirement.
Is it percent of time, and if so, what time? A fuselage for a
Lightning takes only a very few hours to "fabricate" at the factory
once the molds have been built, so maybe it only contributes a few
hours to the total "fabrication and assembly time" for the aircraft.
If that's the case, the lower the total number of hours needed to
fabricate and assemble the factory-supplied parts, the fewer the
hours the amateur builder needs to put into the aircraft to meet the
51% rule.
That may be the saving grace for the Lightning, in that the nature of
an airplane built from composite molds is such that there aren't that
many total hours.
Hugh Sontag
>Buz,
>
>I understand you have quoted the AOPA here, but are you getting the
>impression that "Existing kit designs essentially would be
>grandfathered" or that "Existing kit designs, already on the FAA's
>51% list, essentially would be grandfathered"?
>
>In this case the difference could be critical because the Lightning
>is not already on the FAA's 51% list.
>
>
>Colin K.
>OK
>Lightning # 52 under construction.
><http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken>http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>n5pb(at)aol.com
>Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 5:08 PM
>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>
>Buz,
>This is good to know, especially since I begin my build in September at
SYI!
>
>"Bear"
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:16 am
>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>
>Tim,
> From one retired AF fighter pilot to another - welcome aboard.
>The answer to your 51% rule question is still a bit "up in the air"
>but we should have a better understanding of the new FAA proposal
>after Oshkosh (I am there now). But reading their proposal, I think
>the Lightning should be OK. Below is a summary of what the AOPA has
>to say about the new proposal. We will get the EAA's take
>in several forums during the convention.
>Blue Skies,
>Buz Rich
>
>The FAA is scrutinizing "fast build" homebuilt aircraft programs and
>with that may come policy changes that affect future kit designs.
>The FAA has released several
><http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/display_docs/index.cfm?Doc_Type=Pub
s>draft
>documents to clarify the regulation of the homebuilt aircraft
>segment. The biggest potential change is to the definition of the
>so-called 51-percent rule. The FAA s original intention was that the
>individual would fabricate more than 50 percent and assemble more
>than 50 percent of the aircraft.
>The FAA became concerned when fast-build kits entered the market
>where an aircraft owner's contribution resulted in 51 percent of the
>assembly only. The agency felt that this did not meet the intent of
>building "solely for their own education or recreation."
>The FAA now defines 51 percent as the builder completing, at a
>minimum, 20 percent of the assembly and 20 percent of the
>fabrication with the remaining 11 percent made up from either
>additional assembly or fabrication. The FAA now states that the
>commercial assistance or "for hire" building programs will not count
>toward 20 percent of the assembly by the individual.
>The policy changes would not affect those flying traditionally
>certified aircraft or already completed amateur-built aircraft.
>Existing kit designs essentially would be grandfathered, while new
>models, after the rules go into effect, would get the extra scrutiny.
>
>
>Get fantasy football with free live scoring.
><http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020>Sign
>up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
>
>
> target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>://forums.matronics.com
>lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>======================
>============
>
>
>The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser.
><http://toolbar.aol.com/tmz/download.html?NCID=aolcmp00050000000014>Get
>the TMZ Toolbar Now!
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matroni
cs.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>
>
><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List>http://www.matronics.com
/Navigator?Lightning-List
><http://www.matronics.com/contribution>http://www.matronics.com/contribue
the es y --> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS nbsp; - List
Contribution Web Site ; ========================
_____
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read
<http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000
017> reviews on AOL Autos.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | EAFerguson(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | O-235 powered Lightning? |
My hanger neighbor came in Saturday PM from OSH with the news that he saw a
Lightning with a Lyc O-235 motor there. News to me! Is there anything to this
or was he just confused.
Why in the world would anybody want to do that???
Earl
**************
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your
budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | : Lightning-List |
| From: | sttwig(at)wabroadband.com |
Nick,
What is "sloshing the tank"? Is that something we all need to do or
something to deal with a leaky fuel tank?
Steve
Kit #48
> Lynn,
>
>
> The show was busy lots of interest. I sloshed the tank last week once and
> I
> am going to do it again this afternoon, so 2 cotes. I will check for leaks
> on Wednesday, if no leaks we will get it back together. I should be able
> to
> fly next week. I would fly this week but I am leaving for Thursday and
> Friday and wont be around to fly. The rest of the crew is gone today and
> tomorrow so not much help here. They are coming back end of this week.
>
>
> Nick
>
>
> _____
>
> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com
> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 11:46 AM
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Lightning-List: : Lightning-List
>
>
> Hey Nick: I know it is none of my business, but did you have a good show
> and
> sell lots of Lightnings? I hope you did. Do you have any idea when N13LN
> might make its first flight?
>
> Lynn
>
>
> In a message dated 8/5/2008 9:37:47 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> info(at)flylightning.net writes:
>
>
>
> To Group,
>
> Arion aircraft will post a longer more detailed read in the next news
> letter, but here are a few thoughts. First the "approved" list is not a
> prerequisite for and EAB inspection or certificate, it only makes the DARs
> job easier in determining who did the major portion of the work. With this
> in mind keep very detailed builders logs of what you are doing why and how
> and you will not have a problem. This was discussed in length at several
> forums at EAA (forgive me if I do not call it Airventure) and this was the
> general consensus. There is nothing wrong with the current rule however
> determining major portion and how to enforce it has loosened. This is the
> focus and it was made clear that those building aircraft at home weather
> on
> the list or not, if showing proof thru builders logs or photos and notes
> would not have a problem showing that they did the work and would not have
> a
> problem receiving there AWCs. The FAA has extended the comment period for
> the proposed policy, This is key, it is a policy and not a rule, they do
> not
> even have to show it to us if they want, but they are. So email
> miguel.vasconcelos(at)faa.gov with your comments. Please do not send
> screamers.
> They will not listen to them and they made that very clear. When sending a
> comment make it clear what you think is wrong and than propose how it
> could
> be fixed or adjusted this is what they want to see. It is our privilege to
> build these aircraft at home and it is our job to help the FAA understand
> that and keep it alive.
>
>
> Nick Otterback
> Arion Aircraft, LLC
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hugh
> Sontag
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 8:27 PM
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>
>
> I suspect "grandfathering" is more likely to apply to aircraft on the
> FAA's list, not to any kit currently being produces.
>
> I looked through that list, and I was surprised at how few aircraft
> were on it, and how many were aircraft that no one would build today,
> like the Cirrus VK-30.
>
> The part that I've always had trouble sorting out is what the
> percentage refers to.
>
> It could be that a tail is considered to be 30% of the aircraft, so
> if you "fabricated" the tail, you'd be done with the fabrication
> requirement.
>
> Is it percent of time, and if so, what time? A fuselage for a
> Lightning takes only a very few hours to "fabricate" at the factory
> once the molds have been built, so maybe it only contributes a few
> hours to the total "fabrication and assembly time" for the aircraft.
>
> If that's the case, the lower the total number of hours needed to
> fabricate and assemble the factory-supplied parts, the fewer the
> hours the amateur builder needs to put into the aircraft to meet the
> 51% rule.
>
> That may be the saving grace for the Lightning, in that the nature of
> an airplane built from composite molds is such that there aren't that
> many total hours.
>
> Hugh Sontag
>
>>Buz,
>>
>>I understand you have quoted the AOPA here, but are you getting the
>>impression that "Existing kit designs essentially would be
>>grandfathered" or that "Existing kit designs, already on the FAA's
>>51% list, essentially would be grandfathered"?
>>
>>In this case the difference could be critical because the Lightning
>>is not already on the FAA's 51% list.
>>
>>
>>Colin K.
>>OK
>>Lightning # 52 under construction.
>><http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken>http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>>n5pb(at)aol.com
>>Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 5:08 PM
>>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>>
>>Buz,
>>This is good to know, especially since I begin my build in September at
> SYI!
>>
>>"Bear"
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
>>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>>Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:16 am
>>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>>
>>Tim,
>> From one retired AF fighter pilot to another - welcome aboard.
>>The answer to your 51% rule question is still a bit "up in the air"
>>but we should have a better understanding of the new FAA proposal
>>after Oshkosh (I am there now). But reading their proposal, I think
>>the Lightning should be OK. Below is a summary of what the AOPA has
>>to say about the new proposal. We will get the EAA's take
>>in several forums during the convention.
>>Blue Skies,
>>Buz Rich
>>
>>The FAA is scrutinizing "fast build" homebuilt aircraft programs and
>>with that may come policy changes that affect future kit designs.
>>The FAA has released several
>><http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/display_docs/index.cfm?Doc_Type=Pub
> s>draft
>>documents to clarify the regulation of the homebuilt aircraft
>>segment. The biggest potential change is to the definition of the
>>so-called 51-percent rule. The FAA s original intention was that the
>>individual would fabricate more than 50 percent and assemble more
>>than 50 percent of the aircraft.
>>The FAA became concerned when fast-build kits entered the market
>>where an aircraft owner's contribution resulted in 51 percent of the
>>assembly only. The agency felt that this did not meet the intent of
>>building "solely for their own education or recreation."
>>The FAA now defines 51 percent as the builder completing, at a
>>minimum, 20 percent of the assembly and 20 percent of the
>>fabrication with the remaining 11 percent made up from either
>>additional assembly or fabrication. The FAA now states that the
>>commercial assistance or "for hire" building programs will not count
>>toward 20 percent of the assembly by the individual.
>>The policy changes would not affect those flying traditionally
>>certified aircraft or already completed amateur-built aircraft.
>>Existing kit designs essentially would be grandfathered, while new
>>models, after the rules go into effect, would get the extra scrutiny.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Get fantasy football with free live scoring.
>><http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020>Sign
>>up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
>>
>>
>> target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>>://forums.matronics.com
>>lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>======================
>>============
>>
>>
>>
>>The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser.
>><http://toolbar.aol.com/tmz/download.html?NCID=aolcmp00050000000014>Get
>>the TMZ Toolbar Now!
>>
>>
>>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matroni
> cs.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>
>>
>>
>><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List>http://www.matronics.com
> /Navigator?Lightning-List
>><http://www.matronics.com/contribution>http://www.matronics.com/contribue
> the es y --> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS nbsp; - List
> Contribution Web Site ; ========================
>
>
> _____
>
> Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read
> <http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000
> 017> reviews on AOL Autos.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
| Subject: | : Lightning-List |
Steve,
You shouldn't have to worry, lynns tanks is the first of 60 tanks that have
been flown to do this. Don't know why. The tank is sloshed with a sealant
before install, my only guess is something between than and install might
have caused a hole. This is to stop a leak using the same sealant as used
with the initial seal.
Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
sttwig(at)wabroadband.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 12:30 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: : Lightning-List
Nick,
What is "sloshing the tank"? Is that something we all need to do or
something to deal with a leaky fuel tank?
Steve
Kit #48
> Lynn,
>
>
> The show was busy lots of interest. I sloshed the tank last week once and
> I
> am going to do it again this afternoon, so 2 cotes. I will check for leaks
> on Wednesday, if no leaks we will get it back together. I should be able
> to
> fly next week. I would fly this week but I am leaving for Thursday and
> Friday and wont be around to fly. The rest of the crew is gone today and
> tomorrow so not much help here. They are coming back end of this week.
>
>
> Nick
>
>
> _____
>
> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com
> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 11:46 AM
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Lightning-List: : Lightning-List
>
>
> Hey Nick: I know it is none of my business, but did you have a good show
> and
> sell lots of Lightnings? I hope you did. Do you have any idea when N13LN
> might make its first flight?
>
> Lynn
>
>
> In a message dated 8/5/2008 9:37:47 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> info(at)flylightning.net writes:
>
>
>
> To Group,
>
> Arion aircraft will post a longer more detailed read in the next news
> letter, but here are a few thoughts. First the "approved" list is not a
> prerequisite for and EAB inspection or certificate, it only makes the DARs
> job easier in determining who did the major portion of the work. With this
> in mind keep very detailed builders logs of what you are doing why and how
> and you will not have a problem. This was discussed in length at several
> forums at EAA (forgive me if I do not call it Airventure) and this was the
> general consensus. There is nothing wrong with the current rule however
> determining major portion and how to enforce it has loosened. This is the
> focus and it was made clear that those building aircraft at home weather
> on
> the list or not, if showing proof thru builders logs or photos and notes
> would not have a problem showing that they did the work and would not have
> a
> problem receiving there AWCs. The FAA has extended the comment period for
> the proposed policy, This is key, it is a policy and not a rule, they do
> not
> even have to show it to us if they want, but they are. So email
> miguel.vasconcelos(at)faa.gov with your comments. Please do not send
> screamers.
> They will not listen to them and they made that very clear. When sending a
> comment make it clear what you think is wrong and than propose how it
> could
> be fixed or adjusted this is what they want to see. It is our privilege to
> build these aircraft at home and it is our job to help the FAA understand
> that and keep it alive.
>
>
> Nick Otterback
> Arion Aircraft, LLC
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hugh
> Sontag
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 8:27 PM
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>
>
> I suspect "grandfathering" is more likely to apply to aircraft on the
> FAA's list, not to any kit currently being produces.
>
> I looked through that list, and I was surprised at how few aircraft
> were on it, and how many were aircraft that no one would build today,
> like the Cirrus VK-30.
>
> The part that I've always had trouble sorting out is what the
> percentage refers to.
>
> It could be that a tail is considered to be 30% of the aircraft, so
> if you "fabricated" the tail, you'd be done with the fabrication
> requirement.
>
> Is it percent of time, and if so, what time? A fuselage for a
> Lightning takes only a very few hours to "fabricate" at the factory
> once the molds have been built, so maybe it only contributes a few
> hours to the total "fabrication and assembly time" for the aircraft.
>
> If that's the case, the lower the total number of hours needed to
> fabricate and assemble the factory-supplied parts, the fewer the
> hours the amateur builder needs to put into the aircraft to meet the
> 51% rule.
>
> That may be the saving grace for the Lightning, in that the nature of
> an airplane built from composite molds is such that there aren't that
> many total hours.
>
> Hugh Sontag
>
>>Buz,
>>
>>I understand you have quoted the AOPA here, but are you getting the
>>impression that "Existing kit designs essentially would be
>>grandfathered" or that "Existing kit designs, already on the FAA's
>>51% list, essentially would be grandfathered"?
>>
>>In this case the difference could be critical because the Lightning
>>is not already on the FAA's 51% list.
>>
>>
>>Colin K.
>>OK
>>Lightning # 52 under construction.
>><http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken>http://www.mykitlog.com/cojaken
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
>>[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>>n5pb(at)aol.com
>>Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 5:08 PM
>>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>>
>>Buz,
>>This is good to know, especially since I begin my build in September at
> SYI!
>>
>>"Bear"
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
>>To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>>Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 10:16 am
>>Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% Rule
>>
>>Tim,
>> From one retired AF fighter pilot to another - welcome aboard.
>>The answer to your 51% rule question is still a bit "up in the air"
>>but we should have a better understanding of the new FAA proposal
>>after Oshkosh (I am there now). But reading their proposal, I think
>>the Lightning should be OK. Below is a summary of what the AOPA has
>>to say about the new proposal. We will get the EAA's take
>>in several forums during the convention.
>>Blue Skies,
>>Buz Rich
>>
>>The FAA is scrutinizing "fast build" homebuilt aircraft programs and
>>with that may come policy changes that affect future kit designs.
>>The FAA has released several
>><http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/display_docs/index.cfm?Doc_Type=Pu
b
> s>draft
>>documents to clarify the regulation of the homebuilt aircraft
>>segment. The biggest potential change is to the definition of the
>>so-called 51-percent rule. The FAA s original intention was that the
>>individual would fabricate more than 50 percent and assemble more
>>than 50 percent of the aircraft.
>>The FAA became concerned when fast-build kits entered the market
>>where an aircraft owner's contribution resulted in 51 percent of the
>>assembly only. The agency felt that this did not meet the intent of
>>building "solely for their own education or recreation."
>>The FAA now defines 51 percent as the builder completing, at a
>>minimum, 20 percent of the assembly and 20 percent of the
>>fabrication with the remaining 11 percent made up from either
>>additional assembly or fabrication. The FAA now states that the
>>commercial assistance or "for hire" building programs will not count
>>toward 20 percent of the assembly by the individual.
>>The policy changes would not affect those flying traditionally
>>certified aircraft or already completed amateur-built aircraft.
>>Existing kit designs essentially would be grandfathered, while new
>>models, after the rules go into effect, would get the extra scrutiny.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Get fantasy football with free live scoring.
>><http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020>Sign
>>up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today.
>>
>>
>> target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>>://forums.matronics.com
>>lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>======================
>>============
>>
>>
>>
>>The Famous, the Infamous, the Lame - in your browser.
>><http://toolbar.aol.com/tmz/download.html?NCID=aolcmp00050000000014>Get
>>the TMZ Toolbar Now!
>>
>>
>>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matron
i
> cs.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
>>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
>>
>>
>>
>><http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List>http://www.matronics.co
m
> /Navigator?Lightning-List
>><http://www.matronics.com/contribution>http://www.matronics.com/contribue
> the es y --> - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS nbsp; - List
> Contribution Web Site ; ========================
>
>
> _____
>
> Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read
>
<http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000
> 017> reviews on AOL Autos.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
| Subject: | O-235 powered Lightning? |
News to me must have been an early Lancair..less motor more weight and money
.don't know why they would want to....0235 is currently 130hp for 250lbs and
20k oh and its old tech...check this week at EAA
Nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
EAFerguson(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 12:26 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: O-235 powered Lightning?
My hanger neighbor came in Saturday PM from OSH with the news that he saw a
Lightning with a Lyc O-235 motor there. News to me! Is there anything to
this or was he just confused.
Why in the world would anybody want to do that???
Earl
**************
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews
on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000
017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pete" <pete(at)flylightning.net> |
The initial issue that caused the FAA to look at the Amateur built rule was
that some companies offering commercial assistance were way over the line.
There is a company that will complete a Glastar in two weeks. That is a
3500 hour build and there is no way that a builder can have enough input to
even come to a 10% involvement let alone 51%.
However, instead of shutting down the commercial operations the FAA has
focused on kit manufacturers and is trying to control the amount of
prefabrication in the kit. This approach will do nothing except encourage
more commercial assistance since there will be more to do to complete the
plane.
The message delivered in the two forums at OSH on the subject is that the
kits are not the problem but commercial assistance is and that the FAA
should focus on commercial assistance.
I believe the FAA people in attendance took that message to heart. As a
result of comments so far the FAA has extended the comment period until Sept
30. It is very important to make your voice heard by the FAA. I would
encourage everyone to comment on the proposal. I will be posting my
comments to the FAA on this list and I would hope that others will post here
as well.
Please be specific in your comments. Cite a paragraph from the proposal and
tell them if you agree or disagree and why. The offer an alternative
solution or approach.
Look for some additional info from Nick soon.
Pete Krotje
Arion Aircraft, LLC
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jhausch
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 12:01 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: 51% Rule
I shared these comments in the EAA tent at Osh yesterday, but I want to
repeat here for the comment of others:
It looks like the level of completion and lack of overall builder performed
glass/composite work on the Lightning might be a problem with the latest
interpretation of the 51% rule.
I would suggest, as an alternative to providing components of the kit in a
"less complete" format, that the FAA allow a builder to demonstrate
glass/composite construction skills on a part which does not become part of
the final aircraft.
I'd gladly build a small and simple mold; lay in gelcoat, glass, resin, etc;
remove and trim; attach a bracket; etc etc.
This would demonstrate to the FAA that I had the experience to work on this
glass kit, but it would not require me to have large molds to do so.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195758#195758
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: O-235 powered Lightning? |
There is a European design called a Falcon (saw it at Sun-N-Fun and at
Oshkosh) that has an 0-235 Lycoming and is kind of a Lightning look alike. They
say they save weight by building the fuselage and wings with kevlar. After
talking with Rick Disher about using kevlar, there would be no real weight
savings, but a real cost increase. Kevlar would be good to use if you wanted
an
airplane to take lots of abuse or gun shots. :-) However, Lycoming is
working on a light weight 0-235 derivative (maybe 0-230) that will be about 100
HP
to compete with the Continental 0-200. Champion wants to use it to save
weight on the new Champ.
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | O-235 powered Lightning? |
Before even reading I would have agreed with Nick=2C probably an early Lanc
air. There is a new LSA engine that might work: the Lycoming IO-233 that w
as debuted at Oskosh. This is based off of the 235=2C but it is 100hp=2C 2
00lb. engine. It is fuel injected with electronic ignition which is cool.
Again though you'd get less power and you'd have to make a special engine
mount. Not worth the trouble in my mind when the Jabiru is a great little
engine. Brian W.
From: info(at)flylightning.netTo: lightning-list(at)matronics.comSubject: RE: Lig
htning-List: O-235 powered Lightning?Date: Tue=2C 5 Aug 2008 13:10:06 -0500
News to me must have been an early Lancair=85.less motor more weight and mo
ney =85don=92t know why they would want to=85=85..0235 is currently 130hp f
or 250lbs and 20k oh and its old tech=85..check this week at EAA
Nick
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-lis
t-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of EAFerguson(at)aol.comSent: Tuesday=2C Aug
ust 05=2C 2008 12:26 PMTo: Lightning-List(at)matronics.comSubject: Lightning-L
ist: O-235 powered Lightning?
My hanger neighbor came in Saturday PM from OSH with the news that he saw a
Lightning with a Lyc O-235 motor there. News to me! Is there anything to t
his or was he just confused.Why in the world would anybody want to do that?
??Earl**************Looking for a car that's sporty=2C fun and fits in your
budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/
expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 ) http://www.matronics.com/contr
ibution
_________________________________________________________________
Reveal your inner athlete and share it with friends on Windows Live.
http://revealyourinnerathlete.windowslive.com?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAG
LM_WLYIA_whichathlete_us
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)earthlink.net> |
Just finished reading the Magazine with Nick sitting in the left seat by
himself, which was strange. The article left me puzzled and confused. I
would be interested in others comments about the content and overal l
tone of the review of the Lightning. Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John Eynon <jeynon2(at)verizon.net> |
Nick,
Hope everything went well at Oshkosh. I wish I could have made it.
I would like you to send me a prop bolt kit. Do the prop bolts need
to be safety wired?
I received my replacement spinner (hope you got my old one back), but
I think it may be polished aluminum instead of chrome. It's a little
hard to tell without seeing both of them next to each other. Perhaps
you could let me know what your records indicate.
Thanks.
John Eynon
On Aug 5, 2008, at 8:17 AM, flylightning wrote:
>
>
> John,
>
> We have prop bolts kits available if you would like one....
>
> Nick Otterback
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of jeynon
> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 10:37 AM
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Lightning-List: Prop bolts
>
>
> After the great response I received on the prop hub question, I
> thought I
> would try again with the prop itself. I'm using a wood Sensenich
> wood prop.
> To bolt the prop to the hub the Jabiru manual calls for AN4-46A
> bolts with
> Belleville washers and nylock nuts. The Sensenich installation
> manual calls
> for safety wiring the bolts.
>
> So, here are my questions.
>
> I don't seem to find Belleville washers at the online aircraft supply
> stores. Are they called something else?
>
> Should I get bolts with pre-drilled heads and safety wire them?
>
> I would think there is no point to drilling and wiring the nuts, as
> they
> could not be re-torqued without replacing everything.
>
> Is there anything else I should keep in mind?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> John Eynon
> Lightning kit #53
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195559#195559
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
Tex=2C
Well....I think that he mentions the early Lightnings as having neutral
to slight negative stability. I can tell you that I have never experienced
this=2C but it would have been more what I would call a neutral to slight
positive stability in pitch from the loadings that I have seen. It was als
o hard to find stick center position without looking. I do think that the
changes that have been made will result in a better overall product for cli
ents. I really liked the feel of the original as it felt more like a fight
er. I asked a guy who has worked testing planes for a long time what he th
ough. Eric replied:
"Wow=2C they couldn't have made a bigger change unless they trimmed the hor
izontal.Lot's of different effects come into play here. In an tab-trimmed
aircraft=2C there is a completely different interaction between stick-free
stability=2C stick-fixed stability=2C and stick-force-gradient than there i
s in a bungee system. Because bungees and springs yield more force for mor
e deflection=2C the bungee system actually has better stick-free stability
at large gust upsets=2C but tends to have low breakout and center forces.
I can understand how this would not bother an experienced pilot who likes l
ight stick forces. The trim tab set up is better for the 20 to 50 hour/yea
r pilots that make up most of the market. As to the CG change=2C I cannot
tell without flying the two aircraft side-by-side. I have seen very small
CG changes make huge differences in stick force gradient in some aircraft
=2C especially if they had a CG close the wing aero center=2C but well forw
ard of the static stability point. This happens on lots of GA aircraft whe
re the tails have been sized generously for low time pilots. The issue is
that while the aircraft is stable at an aft CG=2C it doesn't "feel" very co
nfidence inspiring. A good test pilot will set down=2C look at the longitu
dinal stability=2C and then decide how deep he wants to explore this region
.So the trim tab system gave you most of the breakout force and centering i
mprovement=2C while the CG change may have done the most for the full-trave
l-full-G-range stick force gradient. That's how the second order stability
and control equations come out. Again=2C I'd have to have either the raw
data or design the control test points myself to be certain and assign figu
res of merit.I used to be a fan of down-springs as a way of increasing stic
k-force gradient for lower time pilots in high performance aircraft. The p
roblem is they swap a positive G longitudinal stability issue for a negativ
e one. We all fly negative in heavy turbulence. Recently=2C I've shifted
my emphasis towards servo and anti-servo tabs and their effects. I am stil
l a fan of bungees to coordinate roll and yaw=2C as on the Mooney. The air
craft can still be slipped and skidded=2C it just takes more force and make
s up for lazy feet in the pattern.By far=2C the best combination of feel=2C
flying qualities=2C stability=2C and control comes from a trim-able horizo
ntal. It is the most expensive and mechanically complex. Second most comp
lex is the manual trim tab system=2C followed by the all-electric. Simplis
t is no system=2C bungees are common on sailplanes where people like a ligh
t feel and max speeds are low."
I think that the above would be a fair assessment. I was with Buz on not t
hinking the change in C.G. in this case had much to do with the stability i
mprovement=2C but as you read above=2C even a slight difference can make a
large improvement on some aircraft. Keep in mind that there are many aircr
aft built with neutral to slightly positive stability. This doesn't mean t
hat you are going to loose control of the aircraft when we talk about stabi
lity. What it does mean is what you read about trimability. It also means
that you have to hand fly the airplane more b/c the stick would pretty muc
h stay at whatever pitch you put it at. I have not personally evaluated th
e new demo=2C but believe what the author reported and remind everybody tha
t if they have an early Lightning and would like to make these changes they
can be made to an already built and flying plane. I also want to remind e
verybody that it's not a recall type of item=2C it doesn't need to/have to
change. Some of these changes were to allow a low time pilot to be able to
easily and confidently fly the airplane. It's a qualitative change based
on "feel". Hope this helps=2C Brian W.
From: wb2ssj(at)earthlink.netTo: Lightning-list(at)matronics.comSubject: Lightnin
g-List: kitplanes Date: Tue=2C 5 Aug 2008 21:16:06 -0400
Just finished reading the Magazine with Nick sitting in the left seat by hi
mself=2C which was strange. The article left me puzzled and confused. I wo
uld be interested in others comments about the content and overal l tone of
the review of the Lightning. Tex
_________________________________________________________________
Got Game? Win Prizes in the Windows Live Hotmail Mobile Summer Games Trivia
Contest
http://www.gowindowslive.com/summergames?ocid=TXT_TAGHM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
Tex and all,
Sorry, this will be a little long, but I will expand a little more on
what I wrote on the subject while I was at OSH. Brian covered a lot in his
recent message.
Overall, I thought the article was good in that it painted Arion as a
progressive or proactive company that is willing to change the product to make
it better for the customers. However, please note that Nick did not change
the trim system because of the draft flight review that the author wrote after
flying the first demo Lightning and Linda's aircraft. The new trim system
was already on Nick's list of changes to make, but perhaps the timing of the
trim change was accelerated because of the upcoming article. Once the new
demo had the new trim system, the author liked the way the new 2008 demo flew.
Of course "better" is a relative term. I liked the light stick forces and
stick force per G that the prototype and original demo had (and Linda's
airplane). However, on long cross country flights it can be more work if you
have
to hand fly it all the time.
As to the neutral pitch stability issue, it was the bungee trim system
that makes the airplane fly like it has those characteristics. Let me
explain: First neutral pitch stability is a great situation for a fighter or
an
aerobatic aircraft (most of my flying time is in these type aircraft) because
both of them are often rapidly going from high speed to low speed and then back
to high speed again, many times during a dog fight or aerobatic sequence.
If you had to constantly re-trim the aircraft with each speed change you would
wear out the trim button. Just kidding, but your work load would be high as
you trimmed the aircraft to keep stick forces low. So they are designed to
always keep low stick forces, but in doing so, it becomes a bit touchy (very
light pitch forces) if you are not used to flying that type of aircraft. If
you current Lightning or Esqual pilots with the bungee trim system want to
test this out, pay attention to which way you really have to trim your aircraft
as you change speeds. A normal aircraft will need more nose up trim as you
slow down and more down trim as you speed up. The bungee system actually
requires very little trim as you change speeds and, depending on how you have
them adjusted, can actually require the reverse of this. Meaning as you slow
down you will need nose down, not nose up. Weird but true. Why, because the
bungee that attaches directly to the up elevator push / pull tube becomes
more effective as you slow and there is not as much airflow over the elevator
holding it in position. Therefore, as you slow, the bungee is able to pull
more and more up elevator. Makes the airplane act like it has an aft CG.
(Note, this is only with flaps up. With flaps down, you are now flying a new
wing
and the bungees generally will not completely trim off all forces.) So the
negative pitch stability that the author mentioned comes from the fact that
when the aircraft (with the bungee system) is slow and you pull back on the
stick and then let go, it will not recover to the previously trimmed flight
condition, it will continue to pitch up by itself because the bungee can pull
more and more up by itself as there is less airflow over the elevator to keep
it in trim. Try as hard as I did to diagram the system to the author and draw
pitch stability curves, he was convinced that it was a CG problem even
though the three Lightnings he flew were all at about the same CG. His comment
was that we must have weighed the aircraft wrong or miss-calculated the Cg.
When you do the pitch up maneuver (pull pack on the stick and let go)
with the new trim system the airplane will return to the previously trimmed
flight condition (airspeed) thus showing good pitch stability. So, the one
thing that I do not agree with is the author's thought that the "better flying
qualities" of the new demo has to do with moving the CG more forward. To
reiterate, the change to the new electric trim system is what made the change,
because the three airplanes he flew had the same CG (within a hair of the same
-
certainly not enough to make a major change like he reported) when he flew
them.
I kind of hate to disagree with him because after many emails, many
phone calls, and flying with him in Linda's airplane, he has become a friend
(even though he is an ex Navy "heavy" driver). He does however, have some
knowledge in his Navy "Noggin". Heck, world record holder Earl (also ex Navy)
knows him, so that in itself is a positive thing. Overall a great guy to talk
to and share war stories and hangar talk with. So my bottom line is that it
is a good article, but I do hope readers will read the entire article and not
just the first part. As to Nick flying in the right seat, all good fighter
pilots want the stick in the right hand and the throttle in the left hand.
Blue Skies,
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
The one thing=2C from my experience that I would like to disagree with=2C a
fter flying several different Lightnings was the "negative static stability
" remark. I have not flown at all C.G. combinations=2C but I have flown at
a similar weight and C.G. range based on fuel and pilot and passenger weig
hts. In my experience the aircraft never showed even a slight negative sta
tic stability characteristic as this would be indicated if you were to pitc
h up and let go of the stick that the aircraft would continue to pitch up.
I never saw this. It would either slowly come back to level through a ser
ies of oscillations or stay wherever you let go of it. I kind of liked thi
s. I haven't flown a lot of fighters like Buz=2C but I have flown some aer
obatic planes. It's interesting when you can just put the nose where you w
ant it=2C basically fly hands off and speed up or slow down while doing so.
If it were negatively static stable you would never be able to fly the pl
ane hands off as it would constantly be wanting to change pitch regardless
of airspeed or trim.
Now what may appeal to some builders about the bungee system is that it is
probably a better setup to dampen out turbulence. You folks out west may w
ant to think about keeping that. You east coast and sunday flyers or low t
ime pilots will probably love the standard trim tab. Still=2C he did come
up with the same conclusion as I did: Love to fly the Lightning and the co
mpany is doing a good job making their product better for the customers. M
y .02 Brian W.
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.comDate: Wed=2C 6 Aug 2008 12:02:55 -0400Subject: Re: Li
ghtning-List: kitplanes To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Tex and all=2C
Sorry=2C this will be a little long=2C but I will expand a little more
on what I wrote on the subject while I was at OSH. Brian covered a lot in
his recent message.
Overall=2C I thought the article was good in that it painted Arion as a
progressive or proactive company that is willing to change the product to
make it better for the customers. However=2C please note that Nick did not
change the trim system because of the draft flight review that the author
wrote after flying the first demo Lightning and Linda's aircraft. The new
trim system was already on Nick's list of changes to make=2C but perhaps th
e timing of the trim change was accelerated because of the upcoming article
. Once the new demo had the new trim system=2C the author liked the way th
e new 2008 demo flew. Of course "better" is a relative term. I liked the
light stick forces and stick force per G that the prototype and original de
mo had (and Linda's airplane). However=2C on long cross country flights it
can be more work if you have to hand fly it all the time.
As to the neutral pitch stability issue=2C it was the bungee trim syste
m that makes the airplane fly like it has those characteristics. Let me ex
plain: First neutral pitch stability is a great situation for a fighter or
an aerobatic aircraft (most of my flying time is in these type aircraft) b
ecause both of them are often rapidly going from high speed to low speed an
d then back to high speed again=2C many times during a dog fight or aerobat
ic sequence. If you had to constantly re-trim the aircraft with each speed
change you would wear out the trim button. Just kidding=2C but your work
load would be high as you trimmed the aircraft to keep stick forces low. S
o they are designed to always keep low stick forces=2C but in doing so=2C i
t becomes a bit touchy (very light pitch forces) if you are not used to fly
ing that type of aircraft. If you current Lightning or Esqual pilots with
the bungee trim system want to test this out=2C pay attention to which way
you really have to trim your aircraft as you change speeds. A normal aircr
aft will need more nose up trim as you slow down and more down trim as you
speed up. The bungee system actually requires very little trim as you chan
ge speeds and=2C depending on how you have them adjusted=2C can actually re
quire the reverse of this. Meaning as you slow down you will need nose dow
n=2C not nose up. Weird but true. Why=2C because the bungee that attaches
directly to the up elevator push / pull tube becomes more effective as you
slow and there is not as much airflow over the elevator holding it in posi
tion. Therefore=2C as you slow=2C the bungee is able to pull more and more
up elevator. Makes the airplane act like it has an aft CG. (Note=2C this
is only with flaps up. With flaps down=2C you are now flying a new wing an
d the bungees generally will not completely trim off all forces.) So the n
egative pitch stability that the author mentioned comes from the fact that
when the aircraft (with the bungee system) is slow and you pull back on the
stick and then let go=2C it will not recover to the previously trimmed fli
ght condition=2C it will continue to pitch up by itself because the bungee
can pull more and more up by itself as there is less airflow over the eleva
tor to keep it in trim. Try as hard as I did to diagram the system to the
author and draw pitch stability curves=2C he was convinced that it was a CG
problem even though the three Lightnings he flew were all at about the sam
e CG. His comment was that we must have weighed the aircraft wrong or miss
-calculated the Cg.
When you do the pitch up maneuver (pull pack on the stick and let go) w
ith the new trim system the airplane will return to the previously trimmed
flight condition (airspeed) thus showing good pitch stability. So=2C the o
ne thing that I do not agree with is the author's thought that the "better
flying qualities" of the new demo has to do with moving the CG more forward
. To reiterate=2C the change to the new electric trim system is what made
the change=2C because the three airplanes he flew had the same CG (within a
hair of the same - certainly not enough to make a major change like he rep
orted) when he flew them.
I kind of hate to disagree with him because after many emails=2C many p
hone calls=2C and flying with him in Linda's airplane=2C he has become a fr
iend (even though he is an ex Navy "heavy" driver). He does however=2C hav
e some knowledge in his Navy "Noggin". Heck=2C world record holder Earl (a
lso ex Navy) knows him=2C so that in itself is a positive thing. Overall
a great guy to talk to and share war stories and hangar talk with. So my b
ottom line is that it is a good article=2C but I do hope readers will read
the entire article and not just the first part. As to Nick flying in the r
ight seat=2C all good fighter pilots want the stick in the right hand and t
he throttle in the left hand.
Blue Skies=2C
Buz
Looking for a car that's sporty=2C fun and fits in your budget? Read review
s on AOL Autos.
_________________________________________________________________
Reveal your inner athlete and share it with friends on Windows Live.
http://revealyourinnerathlete.windowslive.com?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAG
LM_WLYIA_whichathlete_us
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)earthlink.net> |
Thanks for your input. It has "inlightinged" me on the subject. Hope
everyone has got back from Osh OK and back to building. My paint cup
runth over. Slow but sure progress . I have a new name for my plane. I
will call it " Juristic park" after the movie. I have encapsulated
every spices of bug, spider, and others in the clear coat. Have your
plane painted somewhere that has a proper booth. The tent don't work. Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Buz and Brian |
In a message dated 8/6/2008 8:09:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wb2ssj(at)earthlink.net writes:
will call it " Juristic park"
How about Jabirusic Park? Did you paint at night? Maybe the bugs will give
you the "golf ball" dimple effect and make your Lightning fly farther and
faster, right down the center of the fairway (make that runway).
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 8/6/2008 6:29:20 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
dashvii(at)hotmail.com writes:
In my experience the aircraft never showed even a slight negative static
stability characteristic as this would be indicated if you were to pitch up and
let go of the stick that the aircraft would continue to pitch up. I never
saw this.
Actually I have seen this at slow airspeeds in all the Lightnings and
Esquals (about 7 differnet aircraft) that I have flown with the exception of the
new demo with the trim tab system.
As to dampening out turbulence, I doubt that there will be $0.02 difference
between bungees and the new trim system. And the other pluses of the new
system way outweigh that if there is a difference. My suggestion to all
currently flying Lightnings and those being built is to go with the new system.
You
will be much happier in the long run and your maintenance headaches with the
bungees (keeping them properly adjusted and replaced on a regular basis)
will be gone. I know if I ever get to build a Lightning, it will have the new
trim system. And with the "break even" price that they are available at, it
is a great deal. If any of you have any doubts, come on out to the September
2nd annual Lightning Fly in and fly the new demo. Heck, all of you should be
there whether or not you have any doubts.
Buzz (ops, typo, but when I spell it with two Zs, the second Z is silent)
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | EAFerguson(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Pitch stability and trim |
Since this has become a hot topic, let me post my experience with the trim.
My Lightning is one of the first, third to fly after the first demo and
Gregg Hobbs's. I'm Serial #5. N17EF was originally equipped with the bungee trim
system, and I had over 200 hours when we installed the new servo trim tabs
last fall. The difference is significant. In my opinion, the new system makes
a
tremendous positive difference. Buz likes to fly his airplanes all the time,
but I like to fold charts and do a few other necessary chores occasionally.
No question in my mind which is better. I did find the stick feel to be a
little heavy with the new trim system, so I added a small bungee on the elevator
pushrod to balance the stick. Take-off and landing trim settings are now
slightly nose up, and stick force on the ground is very light. In flight at
cruise, trim is near neutral.
What more could you ask for?
And no question about any difference in early and later Lightnings. It
should make no difference.
Looking forward to the Fall Gathering in Shelbyville!
Earl Ferguson
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Davis" <johnsdtn40(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Pitch stability and trim |
Earl:
My trim experience.
I installed the Strong Trim System in my lightning #14 It works about the
same as a bungee system but is a lot less bulky and does not wear out. I
found that the system works very well and has plenty of throw. The springs
in the Strong system take the pressures off the stick. I am selling my
lightning for health reasons but if I were keeping it I would be putting the
new trim system in right now.
John Davis
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
EAFerguson(at)aol.com
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 7:29 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Pitch stability and trim
Since this has become a hot topic, let me post my experience with the trim.
My Lightning is one of the first, third to fly after the first demo and
Gregg Hobbs's. I'm Serial #5. N17EF was originally equipped with the bungee
trim system, and I had over 200 hours when we installed the new servo trim
tabs last fall. The difference is significant. In my opinion, the new system
makes a tremendous positive difference. Buz likes to fly his airplanes all
the time, but I like to fold charts and do a few other necessary chores
occasionally. No question in my mind which is better. I did find the stick
feel to be a little heavy with the new trim system, so I added a small
bungee on the elevator pushrod to balance the stick. Take-off and landing
trim settings are now slightly nose up, and stick force on the ground is
very light. In flight at cruise, trim is near neutral.
What more could you ask for?
And no question about any difference in early and later Lightnings. It
should make no difference.
Looking forward to the Fall Gathering in Shelbyville!
Earl Ferguson
_____
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read
<http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000
017> reviews on AOL Autos.
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 8/5/2008 9:17:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wb2ssj(at)earthlink.net writes:
Just finished reading the Magazine with Nick sitting in the left seat by
himself, which was strange. The article left me puzzled and confused. I would
be interested in others comments about the content and overal l tone of the
review of the Lightning. Tex
Buz has offered his more detailed discussion of the content of the
Kitplanes article, I want to offer a couple other ones.
1) The editors comments and the article tried to complement Nick, et al, on
their willingness to make changes to the design-----without explaining that
the magazine was in effect holding a loaded gun to Nick's head. Had the
cooperation not been there the negative and error-filled story would likely have
run.. or no story at all. While it may not have bothered Nick that much, I
consider it a breach of journalism practice.
In my day, the Media was never the story, it was only to report it. And
most of all, the media should never CAUSE the story.
2) It would appear that the writer of the story was not really qualified to
write it. Oh, he holds degrees and has lots of experience as a Navy pilot,
etc. He just has very little experience with planes like the Lightning. I
have not flown for the Navy, the Army or even the Air Force. I only hold
Commercial, Instrument, Single and Multi tickets in some 30 or so birds over some
40 years. I do not consider myself a test pilot. But the Lightning Ryan
and I first built flew just fine. I agree there was some annoying features
to the trim system. But who the hell cares? It flys fast well, it lands
very slow, it climbs like a homesick angel, it is smooth and handles like an
imported sports car. That is the story, not some crap about the CG and the
trim system. In short, the writer missed the boat. By a lot. Did it
improve the Lightning by moving the CG forward a bit and having a trim tab like
other planes? Of course. But that should not have been the real focus.
3) What should scare the hell out of KitPlanes is the reaction of others
who would bring a new plane to market. About 3 years ago I worked with
Kitplanes to have the SkyRanger flown at Sun n Fun. That writer was a seasoned
professional and did a great job. He accurately picked out the good and not so
good features of a SkyRanger. I answered his questions and he was
reassuring. It was still nerve-wracking to deal with media, but I was pleased
with
the outcome. He wrote a good, honest report. At the time we were advertising
significantly in the magazine.
But NOW if I were a manufacturer I would not be very excited to hear
Kitplanes wanted to do a story about my new bird. This guy and the editor missed
the news point of the Lightning. What if they cant understand the real
features of my new design? Why would I want to advertise with them? Am I
to
be the next designer to be badgered by them?
I want to reread the article and plan to write a letter to the editor that
will better make the above points.
Tex, I think your being puzzled and confused is a reasonable response.
Doug Koenigsberg
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)aol.com |
Excellent words, Doug, some points I had not even considered. Well thought
out and succinctly put, as always.
Blue skies,
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | August issue of the Lightning Newsletter |
All,
Earlier this evening I forwarded the latest newsletter to Pete at Lightning
and to Jim Langley for them to post of their respective web sites. The
addresses for the respective sites are:
_http://www.flylightning.net/_ (http://www.flylightning.net/)
_http://www.jimslightning.com/html/home.html_
(http://www.jimslightning.com/html/home.html)
As always, I would really like to receive some specific feedback on the
newsletter. What things do you like or dislike? What can we co better? What
would you like to see in future issues? What kind of info do you want from
SYI? What would be helpful from the individual dealers? What can you as a
builder, flyer, or just a Lightning enthusiast send in to be published in a
future issue? Can you tell I am a little frustrated and looking for some
"vectors" on how this thing should be "flying"? Heck, I need some velocity as
well
as vectors, or otherwise I will soon burn out. "Push it up, lead, you are
falling behind." As I said, any and all feedback will be helpful.
Blue Skies,
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
I'm also with Doug RE the article, I managed to get a copy of the
article (thanks again) and was surprised at the fixation, the ramblings
of the content. As Doug says something like this can kill an aircraft's
reputation with a periodical like kit planes and its circulation. The
instability was undoubtedly caused by the bungee system which was
quickly pointed out to me (thanks again) and without bungee up trim
she's stable. With the new trim sorted. Doesn't take much to say that
but the guy has managed to run on about it for some 10 pages and flavour
what could have been a great article.
One question, was Nick and everyone at Arion aware of the trim bungees
effect on the stability at the first flight test?
Before the reunion 'of sorts'.
With my communication with the LAA's engineer explaining the delay in my
taking the Esqual to him he confirmed bungee up trim has been the cause
of stability issues in a number of types. The latest, the TL Sting,
which you might have seen in the LS category.
The guy who flew my Esqual for it's initial flights gets kitplanes and
understands more about planes and controls than I'll ever know. He
writes tests for a number of periodicals in the UK. I'll ask him for an
opinion about the article.
One thing, it was nice to see the Lightning's heritage recognised with
the Esqual comment.
The rest of the comments seem good if a little opinionated (but that
what we want isn't it?, the magazines opinion) and the self deprecating
style has a certain charm.
Regards, Clive
UK Esqual
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Kayberg(at)aol.com
Sent: 07 August 2008 23:21
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: kitplanes
In a message dated 8/5/2008 9:17:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wb2ssj(at)earthlink.net writes:
Just finished reading the Magazine with Nick sitting in the left
seat by himself, which was strange. The article left me puzzled and
confused. I would be interested in others comments about the content and
overal l tone of the review of the Lightning. Tex
Buz has offered his more detailed discussion of the content of the
Kitplanes article, I want to offer a couple other ones.
1) The editors comments and the article tried to complement Nick, et al,
on their willingness to make changes to the design-----without
explaining that the magazine was in effect holding a loaded gun to
Nick's head. Had the cooperation not been there the negative and
error-filled story would likely have run.. or no story at all. While it
may not have bothered Nick that much, I consider it a breach of
journalism practice.
In my day, the Media was never the story, it was only to report it.
And most of all, the media should never CAUSE the story.
2) It would appear that the writer of the story was not really qualified
to write it. Oh, he holds degrees and has lots of experience as a Navy
pilot, etc. He just has very little experience with planes like the
Lightning. I have not flown for the Navy, the Army or even the Air
Force. I only hold Commercial, Instrument, Single and Multi tickets in
some 30 or so birds over some 40 years. I do not consider myself a
test pilot. But the Lightning Ryan and I first built flew just fine.
I agree there was some annoying features to the trim system. But who
the hell cares? It flys fast well, it lands very slow, it climbs like
a homesick angel, it is smooth and handles like an imported sports car.
That is the story, not some crap about the CG and the trim system. In
short, the writer missed the boat. By a lot. Did it improve the
Lightning by moving the CG forward a bit and having a trim tab like
other planes? Of course. But that should not have been the real focus.
3) What should scare the hell out of KitPlanes is the reaction of
others who would bring a new plane to market. About 3 years ago I
worked with Kitplanes to have the SkyRanger flown at Sun n Fun. That
writer was a seasoned professional and did a great job. He accurately
picked out the good and not so good features of a SkyRanger. I answered
his questions and he was reassuring. It was still nerve-wracking to
deal with media, but I was pleased with the outcome. He wrote a good,
honest report. At the time we were advertising significantly in the
magazine.
But NOW if I were a manufacturer I would not be very excited to hear
Kitplanes wanted to do a story about my new bird. This guy and the
editor missed the news point of the Lightning. What if they cant
understand the real features of my new design? Why would I want to
advertise with them? Am I to be the next designer to be badgered by
them?
I want to reread the article and plan to write a letter to the editor
that will better make the above points.
Tex, I think your being puzzled and confused is a reasonable response.
Doug Koenigsberg
________________________________
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read
reviews on AOL Autos
<http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut0005000
0000017> .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | August issue of the Lightning Newsletter |
| From: | "Wayne Patterson" <Wayne(at)lpwa.net> |
Can only suggest photo documented travel logs of trips with Lightnings.
When mine is built that will be the primary use - so I need some dream
material!
Wayne P in Perth Australia
________________________________
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, 8 August 2008 9:27 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: August issue of the Lightning Newsletter
All,
Earlier this evening I forwarded the latest newsletter to Pete at
Lightning and to Jim Langley for them to post of their respective web
sites. The addresses for the respective sites are:
http://www.flylightning.net/
http://www.jimslightning.com/html/home.html
As always, I would really like to receive some specific feedback on the
newsletter. What things do you like or dislike? What can we co better?
What would you like to see in future issues? What kind of info do you
want from SYI? What would be helpful from the individual dealers? What
can you as a builder, flyer, or just a Lightning enthusiast send in to
be published in a future issue? Can you tell I am a little frustrated
and looking for some "vectors" on how this thing should be "flying"?
Heck, I need some velocity as well as vectors, or otherwise I will soon
burn out. "Push it up, lead, you are falling behind." As I said, any
and all feedback will be helpful.
Blue Skies,
Buz
________________________________
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read
reviews on AOL Autos
<http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut000500
0
0000017> .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: August issue of the Lightning Newsletter |
Wow, great suggestion Wayne. I will try to promote that idea in future
issues. And for a start - anyone currently flying their Lightning have a good
cross country flight that you could share with us? Photos of your trip and
actual performance numbers would be good info to share.
Blue Skies,
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: August issue of the Lightning Newsletter |
Buz,
For someone who wasn't able to go to OSH this year and experience the Lightning
"staff" in action, it was nice you captured it in the newslswtter.? This Month's
newsletter was also very well written and informative.? As a new builder (start
in Sept) it was also nice to see some of the other builders interior avionics
arrangement and paint schemes.
Mark is working on my Serial Number so i can get my paperwork off to the FAA.?
However, for your record my N number is N82PB.
Take care,
Bear Bryant
-----Original Message-----
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Sent: Thu, 7 Aug 2008 9:26 pm
Subject: Lightning-List: August issue of the Lightning Newsletter
All,
Earlier this?evening I forwarded the latest newsletter to Pete at Lightning and
to Jim Langley for them to post of their respective web sites.? The addresses
for the respective sites are:
http://www.flylightning.net/
http://www.jimslightning.com/html/home.html
?
As always, I would really like to receive some specific feedback on the newsletter.?
What things do you like or dislike?? What can we co better?? What would
you like to see in future issues?? What kind of info do you want from SYI?? What
would be helpful from the individual dealers?? What can you as a builder, flyer,
or just a Lightning enthusiast send in to be published in a future issue?
?Can you tell I am a little frustrated and looking for some "vectors" on?how
this thing should be "flying"???Heck, I need some velocity as well as vectors,
or otherwise I will soon burn out.??"Push it up, lead, you are falling behind."?
?As I said, any and all feedback will be helpful.?
Blue Skies,
Buz
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL
Autos.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
See below, feedback from Stan Hodgkins. As I said Stan tests and writes
for a number of periodicals and was good enough to do the initial
flights on my Esqual. Stan also flew the original Lightning, the RAF
English Electric one.....Hunters, Buccaneers. He also flew for Martin
Baker firing dummies out the back of a Meteor. He will fly the RV10 for
the LAA approval shortly. So, I figure he know's what he is talking
about!
Regards, Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Hodgkins [mailto:stan.hodgkins39(at)tiscali.co.uk]
Sent: 08 August 2008 11:58
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: kitplanes
Hi Clive
Yes, I did read the article in Kit Planes and I thought it was quite
fairly done. The point he made about Nick listening and being open to
improvements was absolutely valid. Chuck Berthe is an extremely
experienced test pilot and is revered in the industry. Vans Aircraft in
particular have a very high regard for him. As far as the longitudinal
trim/control is concerned Chuck found much the same as we did, I
thought.
When test pilots try out a new machine, the owner/designer is obviously
keen to have a good report, but a conscientious test pilot is just going
to write the truth on what he finds. This is not the media pointing a
gun at the designer's head, just the tp pointing out any faults he finds
- that is the whole point of test flying. I have had this recently with
the *********** - I just told it as I found it. We are doing nobody any
favours by ignoring shortcomings, especially in regard
to handling qualities. In the past some pilots have heaped unearned
praise on aircraft, customers have bought them and been disappointed.
Many kit aircraft have, in the past, been sold before they were ready
for marketing. The early Kitfoxes were an example and there were many
landing accidents before they fixed it with the Mark 4.
As Bob Hoover said once - 'never fly the A model of anything!'
All the best
Stan
-----Original Message-----
From: James, Clive R [mailto:clive.james(at)uk.bp.com]
Sent: 08 August 2008 04:38
Subject: FW: Lightning-List: kitplanes
Hi Stan, did you get your kitplanes yet? Did you read the Lightning test
article? What are your thoughts to what the guy wrote?, see below and
attached.
Regards, Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Kayberg(at)aol.com
Sent: 07 August 2008 23:21
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: kitplanes
In a message dated 8/5/2008 9:17:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wb2ssj(at)earthlink.net writes:
Just finished reading the Magazine with Nick sitting in the left
seat by himself, which was strange. The article left me puzzled and
confused. I would be interested in others comments about the content and
overal l tone of the review of the Lightning. Tex
Buz has offered his more detailed discussion of the content of the
Kitplanes article, I want to offer a couple other ones.
1) The editors comments and the article tried to complement Nick, et al,
on their willingness to make changes to the design-----without
explaining that the magazine was in effect holding a loaded gun to
Nick's head. Had the cooperation not been there the negative and
error-filled story would likely have run.. or no story at all. While it
may not have bothered Nick that much, I consider it a breach of
journalism practice. In my day, the Media was never the story, it was
only to report it. And most of all, the media should never CAUSE the
story.
2) It would appear that the writer of the story was not really qualified
to write it. Oh, he holds degrees and has lots of experience as a Navy
pilot, etc. He just has very little experience with planes like the
Lightning. I have not flown for the Navy, the Army or even the Air
Force. I only hold Commercial, Instrument, Single and Multi tickets in
some 30 or so birds over some 40 years. I do not consider myself a
test pilot. But the Lightning Ryan and I first built flew just fine.
I agree there was some annoying features to the trim system. But who
the hell cares? It flys fast well, it lands very slow, it climbs like
a homesick angel, it is smooth and handles like an imported sports car.
That is the story, not some crap about the CG and the trim system. In
short, the writer missed the boat. By a lot. Did it improve the
Lightning by moving the CG forward a bit and having a trim tab like
other planes? Of course. But that should not have been the real focus.
3) What should scare the hell out of KitPlanes is the reaction of
others who would bring a new plane to market. About 3 years ago I
worked with Kitplanes to have the SkyRanger flown at Sun n Fun. That
writer was a seasoned professional and did a great job. He accurately
picked out the good and not so good features of a SkyRanger. I answered
his questions and he was reassuring. It was still nerve-wracking to
deal with media, but I was pleased with the outcome. He wrote a good,
honest report. At the time we were advertising significantly in the
magazine.
But NOW if I were a manufacturer I would not be very excited to hear
Kitplanes wanted to do a story about my new bird. This guy and the
editor missed the news point of the Lightning. What if they cant
understand the real features of my new design? Why would I want to
advertise with them? Am I to be the next designer to be badgered by
them?
I want to reread the article and plan to write a letter to the editor
that will better make the above points.
Tex, I think your being puzzled and confused is a reasonable response.
Doug Koenigsberg
________________________________
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read
reviews on AOL Autos
<http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut0005000
0000017> .
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
8/7/2008 8:49 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 8/9/2008 6:55:52 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
clive.james(at)uk.bp.com writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "James, Clive R"
See below, feedback from Stan Hodgkins. As I said Stan tests and writes
for a number of periodicals and was good enough to do the initial
flights on my Esqual. Stan also flew the original Lightning, the RAF
English Electric one.....Hunters, Buccaneers. He also flew for Martin
Baker firing dummies out the back of a Meteor. He will fly the RV10 for
the LAA approval shortly. So, I figure he know's what he is talking
about!
Regards, Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Hodgkins [mailto:stan.hodgkins39(at)tiscali.co.uk]
Sent: 08 August 2008 11:58
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: kitplanes
Hi Clive
Yes, I did read the article in Kit Planes and I thought it was quite
fairly done. The point he made about Nick listening and being open to
improvements was absolutely valid. Chuck Berthe is an extremely
experienced test pilot and is revered in the industry. Vans Aircraft in
particular have a very high regard for him. As far as the longitudinal
trim/control is concerned Chuck found much the same as we did, I
thought.
When test pilots try out a new machine, the owner/designer is obviously
keen to have a good report, but a conscientious test pilot is just going
to write the truth on what he finds. This is not the media pointing a
gun at the designer's head, just the tp pointing out any faults he finds
- that is the whole point of test flying. I have had this recently with
the *********** - I just told it as I found it. We are doing nobody any
favours by ignoring shortcomings, especially in regard
to handling qualities. In the past some pilots have heaped unearned
praise on aircraft, customers have bought them and been disappointed.
Many kit aircraft have, in the past, been sold before they were ready
for marketing. The early Kitfoxes were an example and there were many
landing accidents before they fixed it with the Mark 4.
As Bob Hoover said once - 'never fly the A model of anything!'
All the best
Stan
-----Original Message-----
Pardon me for being a bit critical, Clive, but .....
As I read your post, it would seem that Stan Hodgkins has NOT flown a
Lightning, particularly the latest and greatest. It would seem he bases his
comments on flying an Esqual, which is NOT a Lightning. EVERYTHING is different,
(wing, tail surfaces, wing tips, fuselage). Worse yet, he bases his further
comments on his respect for Chuck Berthe. Yes, I am aware that Chuck has
the respect of Van's (or at least publicly) and has been flying a nose-heavy
Van's bird which he built. But an RV is not an Lightning. Vans makes no
bones about offering a design that can be aerobatic. It is also designed around
a heavy engine. Neither is true of a Lightning.
Kitplanes chose to feature the CHANGES that were supposedly made because the
Lightning didn't pass the Chuck Bertha test with flying colors. Some of us
assert that the changes were minor and would have happened anyway. I am
personally questioning how changing the trim system can suddenly make it a fine
airplane. I am saying I thought it flew just fine with the old annoying trim
system, so what is the big deal?
I agree that test pilots should tell the truth. But it should be with some
perspective. And they should listen to the comments of other highly
qualified pilots (Like Buz and Linda) who have no financial attachment to Arion
Lightning.
Further, the point of the article should have been about the LATEST model
available, SINCE THAT IS WHAT PURCHASORS WILL GET. It would seem silly to
discuss the Kitfox I and its problems when the production (if it is still being
produced) is up to about #8. Same for the Lightning.
My final point is that the Lighting is still being changed. When we picked
up the next two kits for our customers, Nick pointed out that the fuselages
have lost another 10 lbs or so! Since the early production the fuselage
alone has lost nearly 30 lbs! The latest ones only weigh about 108 lbs. By
changing the foam core used, they have lost weight and gained strength. The
tailfeathers have lost some weight also.
So I do agree that the later production of a model is usually better than
the "A" model. But as we see at the airshows, the "A" model of an F-22 Raptor
easily outflys the "Z" model of anything else in the sky!!
Doug Koenigsberg
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
"Since the early production the fuselage alone has lost nearly 30 lbs!"And
correct me if I'm wrong=2C but since the prototype in its original configur
ation has lost much more than that! Brian W.
_________________________________________________________________
Your PC=2C mobile phone=2C and online services work together like never bef
ore.
________________________________________________________________________________
In a message dated 8/9/2008 8:40:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
dashvii(at)hotmail.com writes:
"Since the early production the fuselage alone has lost nearly 30 lbs!"
And correct me if I'm wrong, but since the prototype in its original
configuration has lost much more than that!
Brian W.
I think you are correct.
I dont remember the weight our first one, so I was trying to be a bit
conservative.
Doug
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
I think we're in the same place.
My question to Stan was what did he think about the article, the way it
was written and the content. I asked him as someone who does what Chuck
does and who has reasonable pedigree. He hasn't of course flown the
Lightning but was recently evaluating the stability of my Esqual so he
could comment to the LAA about it so has been digging around that area
of the flight characteristics of a similar aircraft (low wing sporty
single).
I thought an awful lot of column inches were spent explaining something
that was irrelevant, history, which is what I thought you were saying.
It was colour to support the conclusion of the later test but given it
was an opportunity to hear an independent view about the plane I, and I
suspect many other readers would have like to hear some more about the
Lightning itself. I hear a lot from you guys about the Lightning but you
have all had the lobotomy, I hope one day to buy my 'last plane' and
although I am getting to like the Esqual I don't think it is that
animal. Chuck's article could have given me more information though as
I've been reading up on stability ever since it was suggested the Esqual
didn't have any I was somewhat interested but not 5 pages interested.
The comment about the Kitfox was made because it got great write ups
here in the UK and lot were sold on the basis of those write ups. The
plane subsequently was involved in many ground incidents as the buyers
had a different plane than they expected. Stan is committed to telling
the truth, warts an all, in his reports as he's explained it doesn't do
anyone any favours (except maybe the manufacturers).
One thing I don't think we'll agree on is which Lightning is best
(whatever 'best' is), The Arion Lightning maybe a fine aircraft and no
doubt will continue to get better but the original Lightning is a
LEGEND. I hope to visit Thunder City one day and get the ride of my
life! http://www.lightning.org.uk/archive/0503.php
CJ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Kayberg(at)aol.com
Sent: 09 August 2008 13:23
Subject: Re: FW: Lightning-List: kitplanes
In a message dated 8/9/2008 6:55:52 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
clive.james(at)uk.bp.com writes:
See below, feedback from Stan Hodgkins. As I said Stan tests and
writes
for a number of periodicals and was good enough to do the
initial
flights on my Esqual. Stan also flew the original Lightning, the
RAF
English Electric one.....Hunters, Buccaneers. He also flew for
Martin
Baker firing dummies out the back of a Meteor. He will fly the
RV10 for
the LAA approval shortly. So, I figure he know's what he is
talking
about!
Regards, Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Hodgkins [mailto:stan.hodgkins39(at)tiscali.co.uk]
Sent: 08 August 2008 11:58
To: James, Clive R
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: kitplanes
Hi Clive
Yes, I did read the article in Kit Planes and I thought it was
quite
fairly done. The point he made about Nick listening and being
open to
improvements was absolutely valid. Chuck Berthe is an extremely
experienced test pilot and is revered in the industry. Vans
Aircraft in
particular have a very high regard for him. As far as the
longitudinal
trim/control is concerned Chuck found much the same as we did, I
thought.
When test pilots try out a new machine, the owner/designer is
obviously
keen to have a good report, but a conscientious test pilot is
just going
to write the truth on what he finds. This is not the media
pointing a
gun at the designer's head, just the tp pointing out any faults
he finds
- that is the whole point of test flying. I have had this
recently with
the *********** - I just told it as I found it. We are doing
nobody any
favours by ignoring shortcomings, especially in regard
to handling qualities. In the past some pilots have heaped
unearned
praise on aircraft, customers have bought them and been
disappointed.
Many kit aircraft have, in the past, been sold before they were
ready
for marketing. The early Kitfoxes were an example and there
were many
landing accidents before they fixed it with the Mark 4.
As Bob Hoover said once - 'never fly the A model of anything!'
All the best
Stan
-----Original Message-----
Pardon me for being a bit critical, Clive, but .....
As I read your post, it would seem that Stan Hodgkins has NOT flown a
Lightning, particularly the latest and greatest. It would seem he bases
his comments on flying an Esqual, which is NOT a Lightning. EVERYTHING
is different, (wing, tail surfaces, wing tips, fuselage). Worse yet, he
bases his further comments on his respect for Chuck Berthe. Yes, I am
aware that Chuck has the respect of Van's (or at least publicly) and has
been flying a nose-heavy Van's bird which he built. But an RV is not
an Lightning. Vans makes no bones about offering a design that can be
aerobatic. It is also designed around a heavy engine. Neither is true
of a Lightning.
Kitplanes chose to feature the CHANGES that were supposedly made because
the Lightning didn't pass the Chuck Bertha test with flying colors.
Some of us assert that the changes were minor and would have happened
anyway. I am personally questioning how changing the trim system can
suddenly make it a fine airplane. I am saying I thought it flew just
fine with the old annoying trim system, so what is the big deal?
I agree that test pilots should tell the truth. But it should be with
some perspective. And they should listen to the comments of other
highly qualified pilots (Like Buz and Linda) who have no financial
attachment to Arion Lightning.
Further, the point of the article should have been about the LATEST
model available, SINCE THAT IS WHAT PURCHASORS WILL GET. It would seem
silly to discuss the Kitfox I and its problems when the production (if
it is still being produced) is up to about #8. Same for the Lightning.
My final point is that the Lighting is still being changed. When we
picked up the next two kits for our customers, Nick pointed out that the
fuselages have lost another 10 lbs or so! Since the early production
the fuselage alone has lost nearly 30 lbs! The latest ones only weigh
about 108 lbs. By changing the foam core used, they have lost weight and
gained strength. The tailfeathers have lost some weight also.
So I do agree that the later production of a model is usually better
than the "A" model. But as we see at the airshows, the "A" model of an
F-22 Raptor easily outflys the "Z" model of anything else in the sky!!
Doug Koenigsberg
________________________________
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read
reviews on AOL Autos
<http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut000500
0
0000017> .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
As I get nearer to flying my Esqual about I was wondering about the
experience of those who cruise around looking for the best MPG?.
Buz has explained his approaches either setting a fuel flow or a target
cruise speed but generally he's always moving fairly swiftly cause he
travels long distances.
Has anyone tried testing the speed/fuel flow for optimum MPG? If so what
RPM is turning in good figures with a reasonable cruise?
Over here in the UK fuel is silly prices, even the unleaded Mogas I run
my planes on. Also we can't go for too long before we get to the
edge......
If I'm going somewhere but am just enjoying the view and not in any
hurry I'll be looking for a speed/fuel burn that is optimum.
My Jabiru (SP, short wing long tail) cruises at 95 knots for 14 litres,
slowing up drops consumption but she quickly gets nose up and the
dragging along means I don't get much improvement on the mpg, certainly
not enough to warrant flopping along with the nose in the air. Long
winged Jabirus fly at 2100 and get 10 litres an hour.
My Esqual doesn't have the spats or leg fairings on yet and has the old
Esqual cowlings and runs against a drag 'wall' at full throttle (I can
only do this for a moment as it overheats on oil temp). Naturally the
top speed will improve when I've done what I can as will the fuel
consumption but what would be a target cruise revs?.
All the numbers on the tests and other reports are all at fairly high
revs, all about showing how fast the planes are.
What about 100knots? Rev's? Fuel burn? 110? 95? My Esqual seems to sit
in the air nicely even quite slowly courtesy of the wings being a little
too long.
What do folk get with the Lightning at economy cruise?
I do realise that the Jab engine is built to rev more than a
conventional aero engine so maybe there's not much to be had for slowing
down....
Ta, Clive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Gallagher <crg326(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
Clive, this article should answer your question,the address is: http://www.
sonexaircraft.com/engines/35_dollar_burger.html . Jab3300 in Sonex with-
Aero Carb. The cross county speeds gave 34 us/mpg and 36 out for a Sunday f
ly. Keep us posted on your results. Rgs. CRG
-- On Sun, 8/10/08, James, Clive R wrote:
From: James, Clive R <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Subject: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG
Date: Sunday, August 10, 2008, 7:03 AM
Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG
As I get nearer to flying my Esqual about I was wondering about the experie
nce of those who cruise around looking for the best MPG?.
Buz has explained his approaches either setting a fuel flow or a target cru
ise speed but generally he's always moving fairly swiftly cause he travels
long distances.
-
Has anyone tried testing the speed/fuel flow for optimum MPG? If so what RP
M is turning in good figures with a reasonable cruise?
Over here in the UK fuel is silly prices, even the unleaded Mogas I run my
planes on. Also we can't go for too long before we get to the edge=85...
If I'm going somewhere but am just enjoying the view and not in any hurry I
'll be looking for a speed/fuel burn that is optimum.
My Jabiru (SP, short wing long tail) cruises at 95 knots for 14 litres, slo
wing up drops consumption but she quickly gets nose up and the dragging alo
ng means I don't get much improvement on the mpg, certainly not enough to w
arrant flopping along with the nose in the air. Long winged Jabirus fly at
2100 and get 10 litres an hour.
My Esqual doesn't have the spats or leg fairings on yet and has the old Esq
ual cowlings and runs against a drag 'wall' at full throttle (I can only do
this for a moment as it overheats on oil temp). Naturally the top speed wi
ll improve when I've done what I can as will the fuel consumption but what
would be a target cruise revs?.
-
All the numbers on the tests and other reports are all at fairly high revs,
all about showing how fast the planes are.
What about 100knots? Rev's? Fuel burn? 110? 95? My Esqual seems to sit in t
he air nicely even quite slowly courtesy of the wings being a little too lo
ng.
What do folk get with the Lightning at economy cruise?
I do realise that the Jab engine is built to rev more than a conventional a
ero engine so maybe there's not much to be had for slowing down=85.
Ta, Clive
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
Charles.
What are the specific advantages of the aero carb besides more economy?
Also, from reading the article, it sounds like the guy was adjusting the
mixture? Do you do this with the aero carb?
Thanks
Jim!
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charles
Gallagher
Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 8:44 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG
Clive, this article should answer your question,the address is:
http://www.sonexaircraft.com/engines/35_dollar_burger.html . Jab3300 in
Sonex with Aero Carb. The cross county speeds gave 34 us/mpg and 36 out for
a Sunday fly. Keep us posted on your results. Rgs. CRG
-- On Sun, 8/10/08, James, Clive R wrote:
From: James, Clive R <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Subject: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG
Date: Sunday, August 10, 2008, 7:03 AM
As I get nearer to flying my Esqual about I was wondering about the
experience of those who cruise around looking for the best MPG?.
Buz has explained his approaches either setting a fuel flow or a target
cruise speed but generally he's always moving fairly swiftly cause he
travels long distances.
Has anyone tried testing the speed/fuel flow for optimum MPG? If so what RPM
is turning in good figures with a reasonable cruise?
Over here in the UK fuel is silly prices, even the unleaded Mogas I run my
planes on. Also we can't go for too long before we get to the edge....
If I'm going somewhere but am just enjoying the view and not in any hurry
I'll be looking for a speed/fuel burn that is optimum.
My Jabiru (SP, short wing long tail) cruises at 95 knots for 14 litres,
slowing up drops consumption but she quickly gets nose up and the dragging
along means I don't get much improvement on the mpg, certainly not enough to
warrant flopping along with the nose in the air. Long winged Jabirus fly at
2100 and get 10 litres an hour.
My Esqual doesn't have the spats or leg fairings on yet and has the old
Esqual cowlings and runs against a drag 'wall' at full throttle (I can only
do this for a moment as it overheats on oil temp). Naturally the top speed
will improve when I've done what I can as will the fuel consumption but what
would be a target cruise revs?.
All the numbers on the tests and other reports are all at fairly high revs,
all about showing how fast the planes are.
What about 100knots? Rev's? Fuel burn? 110? 95? My Esqual seems to sit in
the air nicely even quite slowly courtesy of the wings being a little too
long.
What do folk get with the Lightning at economy cruise?
I do realise that the Jab engine is built to rev more than a conventional
aero engine so maybe there's not much to be had for slowing down..
Ta, Clive
http://www.mw" target="_blank"
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matList Contribution
"nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Lightning newsletter is online |
Well, I am back from Alaska and put the latest newsletter up on the web site
with all the rest. Once again, great job Buz and Linda putting things
together and thanks to all who contributed.
The newsletter can be found at www.jimslightning.com and click on the
newsletter link.
I also added a page that will log my flight test activities. It is just a
table for now, but I will add more information as a progress with the flight
testing. As always, any suggestions are welcome.
Jim!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
What sort of speed Charles?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charles
Gallagher
Sent: 11 August 2008 01:44
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG
Clive, this article should answer your question,the address is:
http://www.sonexaircraft.com/engines/35_dollar_burger.html . Jab3300 in
Sonex with Aero Carb. The cross county speeds gave 34 us/mpg and 36 out
for a Sunday fly. Keep us posted on your results. Rgs. CRG
-- On Sun, 8/10/08, James, Clive R wrote:
From: James, Clive R <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Subject: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best
MPG
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Sunday, August 10, 2008, 7:03 AM
As I get nearer to flying my Esqual about I was wondering about
the experience of those who cruise around looking for the best MPG?.
Buz has explained his approaches either setting a fuel flow or a
target cruise speed but generally he's always moving fairly swiftly
cause he travels long distances.
Has anyone tried testing the speed/fuel flow for optimum MPG? If
so what RPM is turning in good figures with a reasonable cruise?
Over here in the UK fuel is silly prices, even the unleaded
Mogas I run my planes on. Also we can't go for too long before we get to
the edge......
If I'm going somewhere but am just enjoying the view and not in
any hurry I'll be looking for a speed/fuel burn that is optimum.
My Jabiru (SP, short wing long tail) cruises at 95 knots for 14
litres, slowing up drops consumption but she quickly gets nose up and
the dragging along means I don't get much improvement on the mpg,
certainly not enough to warrant flopping along with the nose in the air.
Long winged Jabirus fly at 2100 and get 10 litres an hour.
My Esqual doesn't have the spats or leg fairings on yet and has
the old Esqual cowlings and runs against a drag 'wall' at full throttle
(I can only do this for a moment as it overheats on oil temp). Naturally
the top speed will improve when I've done what I can as will the fuel
consumption but what would be a target cruise revs?.
All the numbers on the tests and other reports are all at fairly
high revs, all about showing how fast the planes are.
What about 100knots? Rev's? Fuel burn? 110? 95? My Esqual seems
to sit in the air nicely even quite slowly courtesy of the wings being a
little too long.
What do folk get with the Lightning at economy cruise?
I do realise that the Jab engine is built to rev more than a
conventional aero engine so maybe there's not much to be had for slowing
down....
Ta, Clive
http://forums.matList Contribution
"nofollow" target="_blank"
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pete Krotje" <pete(at)flylightning.net> |
| Subject: | Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
There is no more economy with an aerocarb. We've shown this for years now.
Several Sonex people boast about a 155 mph cruise at 4.9 gallons per hour.
We can routinely do 120 knots in a bigger heavier aircraft on 4.9 gph with
the bing in our Jabiru J230's.
Pete Krotje
Jabiru USA
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim Langley
Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 9:07 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG
Charles.
What are the specific advantages of the aero carb besides more economy?
Also, from reading the article, it sounds like the guy was adjusting the
mixture? Do you do this with the aero carb?
Thanks
Jim!
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charles
Gallagher
Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 8:44 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG
Clive, this article should answer your question,the address is:
http://www.sonexaircraft.com/engines/35_dollar_burger.html . Jab3300 in
Sonex with Aero Carb. The cross county speeds gave 34 us/mpg and 36 out for
a Sunday fly. Keep us posted on your results. Rgs. CRG
-- On Sun, 8/10/08, James, Clive R wrote:
From: James, Clive R <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Subject: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG
Date: Sunday, August 10, 2008, 7:03 AM
As I get nearer to flying my Esqual about I was wondering about the
experience of those who cruise around looking for the best MPG?.
Buz has explained his approaches either setting a fuel flow or a target
cruise speed but generally he's always moving fairly swiftly cause he
travels long distances.
Has anyone tried testing the speed/fuel flow for optimum MPG? If so what RPM
is turning in good figures with a reasonable cruise?
Over here in the UK fuel is silly prices, even the unleaded Mogas I run my
planes on. Also we can't go for too long before we get to the edge....
If I'm going somewhere but am just enjoying the view and not in any hurry
I'll be looking for a speed/fuel burn that is optimum.
My Jabiru (SP, short wing long tail) cruises at 95 knots for 14 litres,
slowing up drops consumption but she quickly gets nose up and the dragging
along means I don't get much improvement on the mpg, certainly not enough to
warrant flopping along with the nose in the air. Long winged Jabirus fly at
2100 and get 10 litres an hour.
My Esqual doesn't have the spats or leg fairings on yet and has the old
Esqual cowlings and runs against a drag 'wall' at full throttle (I can only
do this for a moment as it overheats on oil temp). Naturally the top speed
will improve when I've done what I can as will the fuel consumption but what
would be a target cruise revs?.
All the numbers on the tests and other reports are all at fairly high revs,
all about showing how fast the planes are.
What about 100knots? Rev's? Fuel burn? 110? 95? My Esqual seems to sit in
the air nicely even quite slowly courtesy of the wings being a little too
long.
What do folk get with the Lightning at economy cruise?
I do realise that the Jab engine is built to rev more than a conventional
aero engine so maybe there's not much to be had for slowing down..
Ta, Clive
http://www.mw" target="_blank"
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matList Contribution
"nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
Thanks for the information Pete. My question about the aerocarb was more
out of curiosity than anything else.
On 8/11/08, Pete Krotje wrote:
>
> There is no more economy with an aerocarb. We've shown this for years
> now. Several Sonex people boast about a 155 mph cruise at 4.9 gallons per
> hour. We can routinely do 120 knots in a bigger heavier aircraft on 4.9 gph
> with the bing in our Jabiru J230's.
>
>
> Pete Krotje
>
> Jabiru USA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Gallagher <crg326(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
Clive,the article did reference average speeds for the cross country and lo
cal flying. There was not much change in MPG with slower flight,which I fou
nd interesting.Who knows what the optimum MPG speed is for other aircraft.W
hat stood out to me in the article was the attention to cylinder head tempe
rature and leaning to that value. With the Bing, after the initial set up,n
o adjusting is required.I have not been able to find a BSFC curve for the 3
300- which usually varies with RPM due to pumping losses.I'm going to the
September engine school and hope get more detailed technical info,if they
have the data I will post it.I wonder if starting from a safe low speed nos
e up configuration adding in 100 rpm increments find the point where angle
of attack levels out and the speed increases, then check the fuel used at f
ill up ,better yet I THINK,if you have a GRT AVIONICS panel with fuel flow
it will calculate your range, thus the best speed/rpm/fuel flow
.Forgive my ramblings,CRG
-On Mon, 8/11/08, James, Clive R wrote:
From: James, Clive R <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG
Date: Monday, August 11, 2008, 1:57 AM
What sort of speed Charles?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Charles
Gallagher
Sent: 11 August 2008 01:44
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG
Clive, this article should answer your question,the address is:
http://www.sonexaircraft.com/engines/35_dollar_burger.html . Jab3300 in
Sonex with Aero Carb. The cross county speeds gave 34 us/mpg and 36 out
for a Sunday fly. Keep us posted on your results. Rgs. CRG
-- On Sun, 8/10/08, James, Clive R wrote:
From: James, Clive R <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Subject: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best
MPG
Date: Sunday, August 10, 2008, 7:03 AM
As I get nearer to flying my Esqual about I was wondering about
the experience of those who cruise around looking for the best MPG?.
Buz has explained his approaches either setting a fuel flow or a
target cruise speed but generally he's always moving fairly swiftly
cause he travels long distances.
Has anyone tried testing the speed/fuel flow for optimum MPG? If
so what RPM is turning in good figures with a reasonable cruise?
Over here in the UK fuel is silly prices, even the unleaded
Mogas I run my planes on. Also we can't go for too long before we get to
the edge......
If I'm going somewhere but am just enjoying the view and not in
any hurry I'll be looking for a speed/fuel burn that is optimum.
My Jabiru (SP, short wing long tail) cruises at 95 knots for 14
litres, slowing up drops consumption but she quickly gets nose up and
the dragging along means I don't get much improvement on the mpg,
certainly not enough to warrant flopping along with the nose in the air.
Long winged Jabirus fly at 2100 and get 10 litres an hour.
My Esqual doesn't have the spats or leg fairings on yet and has
the old Esqual cowlings and runs against a drag 'wall' at full throttle
(I can only do this for a moment as it overheats on oil temp). Naturally
the top speed will improve when I've done what I can as will the fuel
consumption but what would be a target cruise revs?.
All the numbers on the tests and other reports are all at fairly
high revs, all about showing how fast the planes are.
What about 100knots? Rev's? Fuel burn? 110? 95? My Esqual seems
to sit in the air nicely even quite slowly courtesy of the wings being a
little too long.
What do folk get with the Lightning at economy cruise?
I do realise that the Jab engine is built to rev more than a
conventional aero engine so maybe there's not much to be had for slowing
down....
Ta, Clive
http://forums.matList Contribution
"nofollow" target="_blank"
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Any difference in cooling requirements between the hydraulic |
and pre-hydraulic engines?
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
I have a hydraulic tappet 3300 Jabiru engine. I've been chasing an
overheating problem whilst having a cooler that was recommended to do
the job. I've proven to myself that the cooler is too small and I now
have the cooler that is standard fit for the J400,430 etc. I've not yet
got it piped up and tried it but on the basis that this cooler in the UK
is usually partially blanked off I'm assuming my overheating problem
will go away.
One thing I did wonder about, has anyone come across a difference in
cooling requirements between the hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
Thanks, Regards, Clive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Any difference in cooling requirements between the |
hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
I believe that Nick has said that the hydraulic engines run a bit hotter.
One thing that he has done to successfully keep the temp down is to
construct a cooling plenum attached to the oil pan vents on the bottom of
the 3300 and then cut and opening in the front of the cowl to allow
additional airflow over the cooling fins of the oil pan.
See the attached pic.
Jim!
On 8/11/08, James, Clive R wrote:
>
> clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
>
> I have a hydraulic tappet 3300 Jabiru engine. I've been chasing an
> overheating problem whilst having a cooler that was recommended to do
> the job. I've proven to myself that the cooler is too small and I now
> have the cooler that is standard fit for the J400,430 etc. I've not yet
> got it piped up and tried it but on the basis that this cooler in the UK
> is usually partially blanked off I'm assuming my overheating problem
> will go away.
>
> One thing I did wonder about, has anyone come across a difference in
> cooling requirements between the hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
>
> Thanks, Regards, Clive
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Allan Maxwell <allanmaxe(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Any difference in cooling requirements between the |
hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
Hi clive this is Allan maxwell I have 2 oil coolers I will send you a picture of
my set up soon. I was likeing to know about your chts ?
--- On Mon, 8/11/08, James, Clive R wrote:
From: James, Clive R <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Subject: Lightning-List: Any difference in cooling requirements between the hydraulic
and pre-hydraulic engines?
Date: Monday, August 11, 2008, 2:56 PM
I have a hydraulic tappet 3300 Jabiru engine. I've been chasing an
overheating problem whilst having a cooler that was recommended to do
the job. I've proven to myself that the cooler is too small and I now
have the cooler that is standard fit for the J400,430 etc. I've not yet
got it piped up and tried it but on the basis that this cooler in the UK
is usually partially blanked off I'm assuming my overheating problem
will go away.
One thing I did wonder about, has anyone come across a difference in
cooling requirements between the hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
Thanks, Regards, Clive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
| Subject: | Any difference in cooling requirements between the |
hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
Clive,
I have noticed that at least with oil temps in our cowl configuration that
the hydraulic lifter engine runs hotter on oil temp. It is ok if we climb
and cruise and than land but when we start doing training and constant
takeoffs it doesnot get a chance to cool down enough so we have made a
little box that seems to work well.
Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of James, Clive
R
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 2:57 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Any difference in cooling requirements between the
hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
I have a hydraulic tappet 3300 Jabiru engine. I've been chasing an
overheating problem whilst having a cooler that was recommended to do
the job. I've proven to myself that the cooler is too small and I now
have the cooler that is standard fit for the J400,430 etc. I've not yet
got it piped up and tried it but on the basis that this cooler in the UK
is usually partially blanked off I'm assuming my overheating problem
will go away.
One thing I did wonder about, has anyone come across a difference in
cooling requirements between the hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
Thanks, Regards, Clive
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Another long distance arrival ... |
| From: | "Wayne Patterson" <Wayne(at)lpwa.net> |
My kit (number 65) arrived in Perth (Western Australia) yesterday and is
safely keeping our cars out of the garage. We have an avid Lightning
community here - with this aircraft being the 4th Lightning to be built
at our club (Serpentine Aircraft Builders club). I am greatly looking
forward to reading the manual, looking at Jim's build site, and
supplying coffee to the Lightning owners in our club who have gone
before me!
The kit was very well packed (I work in logistics) and fits well in my
garage with good, safe work room around it. Had the "Round Sounds" Vol
1 CD playing as we unloaded (for those of you who like NOISE!).
Cheers form WA
Wayne Patterson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Another long distance arrival ... |
Dang Wayne:
There ARE real houses in Australia!!
Great to hear that you received your kit and everything is in order! Now
the REAL fun begins.
Whenever I hear of someone like you who is starting on a new Lightning, I
start getting the same tingles up and down my back like I did when mine came
in for the first time.
Have at it and enjoy!
Jim
N730AL
www.jimslightning.com
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wayne
Patterson
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2008 7:55 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Another long distance arrival ...
My kit (number 65) arrived in Perth (Western Australia) yesterday and is
safely keeping our cars out of the garage. We have an avid Lightning
community here - with this aircraft being the 4th Lightning to be built at
our club (Serpentine Aircraft Builders club). I am greatly looking forward
to reading the manual, looking at Jim's build site, and supplying coffee to
the Lightning owners in our club who have gone before me!
The kit was very well packed (I work in logistics) and fits well in my
garage with good, safe work room around it. Had the "Round Sounds" Vol 1 CD
playing as we unloaded (for those of you who like NOISE!).
Cheers form WA
Wayne Patterson
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Must be a thunderstorm, Lightning everywhere! |
| From: | "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au> |
Kit 66 has arrived in Horsham in the State of Victoria in south eastern Australia.
I have had fun unpacking boxes and have started sanding and cutting holes.
So far interior rough sanded, opera windows cut out and spar cutouts made.
For those interested I am running a blog here http://www.recreationalflying.com.au/forum/blog.php?u=1094
It will be a bit of a diary, some pictures and some comments about how the build
goes. Everyone is welcome to browse and there may even be an idea or two to
get your creative juices flowing but remember the usual caveat. This is what
I'm doing, there is no recommendation that anyone else should do the same, I
have no special qualifications in design or construction and this is my first
build.
The other side of the coin is that I find the process of researching, discussing
and planning to be great fun. Make sure you enjoy that part of your own build
too, its a good part of the journey.
Cheers, Selwyn
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198065#198065
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Allan Maxwell <allanmaxe(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Any difference in cooling requirements between the |
hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
Clive I am sending 6 pictures total --3 with this email of my planes- o
il cooling system. Allan
-
--- On Mon, 8/11/08, James, Clive R wrote:
From: James, Clive R <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Subject: Lightning-List: Any difference in cooling requirements between the
hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
Date: Monday, August 11, 2008, 2:56 PM
I have a hydraulic tappet 3300 Jabiru engine. I've been chasing an
overheating problem whilst having a cooler that was recommended to do
the job. I've proven to myself that the cooler is too small and I now
have the cooler that is standard fit for the J400,430 etc. I've not yet
got it piped up and tried it but on the basis that this cooler in the UK
is usually partially blanked off I'm assuming my overheating problem
will go away.
One thing I did wonder about, has anyone come across a difference in
cooling requirements between the hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
Thanks, Regards, Clive
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
In a message dated 8/9/2008 11:19:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
clive.james(at)uk.bp.com writes:
One thing I don't think we'll agree on is which Lightning is best
(whatever 'best' is), The Arion Lightning maybe a fine aircraft and no
doubt will continue to get better but the original Lightning is a
LEGEND.
Hey Clive,
When you mentioned the original Lightning, did you forget the P-38? And
of course now we have the latest Lightning, the F-35, Lightning II. All are
great airplanes, both past and present. Alas, I wish I had been able to fly
all of them, not just the Arion model.
Blue Skies,
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: August issue of the Lightning Newsletter |
Thanks, Bear,
I will see you at the Lightning Fly-In in September.
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
In a message dated 8/10/2008 8:08:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
clive.james(at)uk.bp.com writes:
Has anyone tried testing the speed/fuel flow for optimum MPG? If so what RPM
is turning in good figures with a reasonable cruise?
Hi Clive,
During my initial 40 hour FAA Phase One testing I did some "Range verses
MPH" charts for N31BZ that would basically be the "optimum MPG" info that
you are looking for. Actually, everyone should plot this data for their
aircraft, but I know how busy we all can get. Heck, I have changed props several
times since I ran those test, so my data is "old" for my airplane as it is
configured today.
At the time I ran these test I was using a fixed pitch Sensenich -
W64ZK54, and I only plotted data for 5,000 feet and 10,000 feet. I "assumed"
a
usable fuel of 25 gallons which would have given a fuel reserve of 3.8 gallons
for 31BZ. (Of course, the OAT air temperature when you are refueling will
vary the amount of fuel you can actually get in the tanks.) After I plotted
the raw data for the various speeds I then had the computer "smooth" out the
data curve (polynomial?) which resulted in a smooth data curve. Having said
all that, with the prop I was running at that time it looks like 120 mph (TAS)
would give the best MPG for 31BZ. In other words, 31BZ would have a range
of about 1000 miles at 10,000' when flying at 120 mph (TAS). MPG for 31BZ at
those numbers is close to 40 MPG, but who the heck wants to go that slow.
Blue Skies,\
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Any difference in cooling requirements between the |
hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
Thanks for the oil cooling pictures. I can see it needs a fair amount of
cooler.
I've sent through some info on my CHT cooling direct.
Thanks everyone for the other cooling tips and info, it will be another
two weeks before I get to fit and pipe up my new cooler but I've got
lots of ideas about what to do next.
Regards, Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Allan
Maxwell
Sent: 11 August 2008 21:59
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Any difference in cooling requirements
between the hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
Hi clive this is Allan maxwell I have 2 oil coolers I will send you a
picture of my set up soon. I was likeing to know about your chts ?
--- On Mon, 8/11/08, James, Clive R wrote:
From: James, Clive R <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Subject: Lightning-List: Any difference in cooling requirements
between the hydraulic and pre-hydraulic engines?
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Monday, August 11, 2008, 2:56 PM
I have a hydraulic tappet 3300 Jabiru engine. I've been chasing
an
overheating problem whilst having a cooler that was recommended
to do
the job. I've proven to myself that the cooler is too small and
I now
have the cooler that is standard fit for the J400,430 etc. I've
not yet
got it piped up and tried it but on the basis that this cooler
in the UK
is usually partially blanked off I'm assuming my overheating
problem
will go away.
One thing I did wonder about, has anyone come across a
difference in
cooling requirements between the hydraulic and pre-hydraulic
engines?
Thanks, Regards, Clive
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
Slow is good at times, I imagine even 145 knots is a little slow for an
Ex Jet Jockey!
Thanks folks for feedback on mpg. 120 mph must be a nice steady cruise
and 40 mpg sound good!
Hopefully I'll get some numbers in a few weeks then I can set to
improving them with some drag reduction.
Regards Clive (halfway between Scotland and Norway for another 2 weeks
yet!)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Sent: 12 August 2008 16:45
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG
In a message dated 8/10/2008 8:08:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
clive.james(at)uk.bp.com writes:
Has anyone tried testing the speed/fuel flow for optimum MPG? If
so what RPM is turning in good figures with a reasonable cruise?
Hi Clive,
During my initial 40 hour FAA Phase One testing I did some "Range
verses MPH" charts for N31BZ that would basically be the "optimum MPG"
info that you are looking for. Actually, everyone should plot this data
for their aircraft, but I know how busy we all can get. Heck, I have
changed props several times since I ran those test, so my data is "old"
for my airplane as it is configured today.
At the time I ran these test I was using a fixed pitch Sensenich -
W64ZK54, and I only plotted data for 5,000 feet and 10,000 feet. I
"assumed" a usable fuel of 25 gallons which would have given a fuel
reserve of 3.8 gallons for 31BZ. (Of course, the OAT air temperature
when you are refueling will vary the amount of fuel you can actually get
in the tanks.) After I plotted the raw data for the various speeds I
then had the computer "smooth" out the data curve (polynomial?) which
resulted in a smooth data curve. Having said all that, with the prop I
was running at that time it looks like 120 mph (TAS) would give the best
MPG for 31BZ. In other words, 31BZ would have a range of about 1000
miles at 10,000' when flying at 120 mph (TAS). MPG for 31BZ at those
numbers is close to 40 MPG, but who the heck wants to go that slow.
Blue Skies,\
Buz
________________________________
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read
reviews on AOL Autos
<http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut0005000
0000017> .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
Clive=2C
You're probably right. I think the landing speed on an F-4 is about 145
knots or so. Brian W.> Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real
cruise for best MPG> Date: Tue=2C 12 Aug 2008 20:24:55 +0100> From: clive.
james(at)uk.bp.com> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com> > --> Lightning-List mes
sage posted by: "James=2C Clive R" > > Slow is good
at times=2C I imagine even 145 knots is a little slow for an> Ex Jet Jockey
!> > Thanks folks for feedback on mpg. 120 mph must be a nice steady cruise
> and 40 mpg sound good! > > Hopefully I'll get some numbers in a few weeks
then I can set to> improving them with some drag reduction.> > Regards Cli
ve (halfway between Scotland and Norway for another 2 weeks> yet!)> > > ---
--Original Message-----> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com> [
mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of> N1BZRich@ao
l.com> Sent: 12 August 2008 16:45> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com> Subjec
t: Re: Lightning-List: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG> > In a me
ssage dated 8/10/2008 8:08:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time=2C> clive.james@uk
.bp.com writes:> > Has anyone tried testing the speed/fuel flow for optimum
MPG? If> so what RPM is turning in good figures with a reasonable cruise?>
> Hi Clive=2C> During my initial 40 hour FAA Phase One testing I did some
"Range> verses MPH" charts for N31BZ that would basically be the "optimum M
PG"> info that you are looking for. Actually=2C everyone should plot this d
ata> for their aircraft=2C but I know how busy we all can get. Heck=2C I ha
ve> changed props several times since I ran those test=2C so my data is "ol
d"> for my airplane as it is configured today. > At the time I ran these te
st I was using a fixed pitch Sensenich -> W64ZK54=2C and I only plotted dat
a for 5=2C000 feet and 10=2C000 feet. I> "assumed" a usable fuel of 25 gall
ons which would have given a fuel> reserve of 3.8 gallons for 31BZ. (Of cou
rse=2C the OAT air temperature> when you are refueling will vary the amount
of fuel you can actually get> in the tanks.) After I plotted the raw data
for the various speeds I> then had the computer "smooth" out the data curve
(polynomial?) which> resulted in a smooth data curve. Having said all that
=2C with the prop I> was running at that time it looks like 120 mph (TAS) w
ould give the best> MPG for 31BZ. In other words=2C 31BZ would have a range
of about 1000> miles at 10=2C000' when flying at 120 mph (TAS). MPG for 31
BZ at those> numbers is close to 40 MPG=2C but who the heck wants to go tha
t slow. > Blue Skies=2C\> Buz> > > > ________________________________> > Lo
oking for a car that's sporty=2C fun and fits in your budget? Read> reviews
on AOL Autos> <http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid
==================> > >
_________________________________________________________________
Get Windows Live and get whatever you need=2C wherever you are. Start here
.
http://www.windowslive.com/default.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Home_082008
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
| From: | "yhol" <playgoldg(at)hotmail.com> |
N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM wrote:
> In a message dated 8/10/2008 8:08:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, clive.james(at)uk.bp.com
writes:
> , with the prop I was running at that time it looks like 120 mph (TAS) would
give the best MPG for 31BZ. In other words, 31BZ would have a range of about
1000 miles at 10,000' when flying at 120 mph (TAS). MPG for 31BZ at those
numbers is close to 40 MPG, but who the heck wants to go that slow.
> Blue Skies,
> Buz
>
>
In this year's NASA GA Technology Challenge ( http://www.eaa.org/news/2008/2008-08-13_challenge.asp ) , no contestants were able to beat 30mpg. Someone should list a lightning in that contest for next year, or is there something I don't get?
Yhol
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198687#198687
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | It sure is quiet in here |
Wow, it got quiet really quick!
(I'm feeling a little lonely...)
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | It sure is quiet in here |
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
Sure is, I thought everyone must be on Vacation.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Langley
Sent: 15 August 2008 19:16
Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Wow, it got quiet really quick!
(I'm feeling a little lonely...)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Haas" <checkpoint2(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | It sure is quiet in here |
Have no fear there are some of us waiting for a less full hangar!
Any one need a PT 19 please? Bob Haas. Buckingham Field Ft. Myers FL.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of James, Clive
R
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 3:09 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Sure is, I thought everyone must be on Vacation.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Langley
Sent: 15 August 2008 19:16
Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Wow, it got quiet really quick!
(I'm feeling a little lonely...)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: It sure is quiet in here |
Maybe it's recovery time from Oshkosh...
On 8/15/08, James, Clive R wrote:
>
> clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
>
> Sure is, I thought everyone must be on Vacation.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim
> Langley
> Sent: 15 August 2008 19:16
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
>
> Wow, it got quiet really quick!
>
> (I'm feeling a little lonely...)
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | It sure is quiet in here |
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
Time to spend some time with the wife + family after using up the
freedom tickets...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Langley
Sent: 15 August 2008 20:22
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Maybe it's recovery time from Oshkosh...
On 8/15/08, James, Clive R wrote:
Sure is, I thought everyone must be on Vacation.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Jim
Langley
Sent: 15 August 2008 19:16
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Wow, it got quiet really quick!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: It sure is quiet in here |
Yeah, but I just spent a bunch of time with my wife in Alaska. Time to
spend some time with the boys....
On 8/15/08, James, Clive R wrote:
>
> clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
>
> Time to spend some time with the wife + family after using up the
> freedom tickets...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim
> Langley
> Sent: 15 August 2008 20:22
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
>
> Maybe it's recovery time from Oshkosh...
>
>
> On 8/15/08, James, Clive R wrote:
>
>
>
> Sure is, I thought everyone must be on Vacation.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Jim
> Langley
> Sent: 15 August 2008 19:16
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
>
> Wow, it got quiet really quick!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: It sure is quiet in here |
Jim, Although?I don't "say" much, I read this every day....I start my build on
Sept 15 at Shelbyville.? I pretty much have my panel laid out and the paint scheme
completed, but I want to review it with the professionals at SYI.
Howmany hours do you have on your bird now?
I'm looking forward to the day I fly mine. (Oct/Nov-hopefully)
Bear
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Langley <pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 2:15 pm
Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Wow, it got quiet really quick!
?
(I'm feeling a little lonely...)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | It sure is quiet in here |
Hey Bear, this is for sure an exciting time for you; and us too! The guys
in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft, and you will learn a
ton, which is what it is all about.
We have about 3 hours on my lightning. (Oshkosh got in the way), but I am
going down to Green Landings this weekend to work and hopefully fly. Ryan
is putting the first few hours on the airplane to "shake out" any of the
wrinkles before I get in it. He is much more experienced in this airplane
thant I am in case of some failure.
I hope to meet up with you at the Shelbyville fly-in?
Jim!
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of n5pb(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 8:55 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Jim, Although I don't "say" much, I read this every day....I start my build
on Sept 15 at Shelbyville. I pretty much have my panel laid out and the
paint scheme completed, but I want to review it with the professionals at
SYI.
Howmany hours do you have on your bird now?
I'm looking forward to the day I fly mine. (Oct/Nov-hopefully)
Bear
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Langley <pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 2:15 pm
Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Wow, it got quiet really quick!
(I'm feeling a little lonely...)
_____
It's time to go back to school! Get the latest trends and gadgets that make
the grade on AOL
<http://shopping.aol.com/back-to-school?ncid=aolins00050000000007>
Shopping.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Lenox" <waynelenox(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: It sure is quiet in here |
Bear
I started my Lightning on May 12 and it was in the air on June 27th. Ma
rk, Nick and Mike will help you through your build and know what they ar
e doing. You will need another month to finish your 40 hrs and complete
your build. Have fun with your new Lightning. I have the 40hrs+ on mi
ne and the only real problem is the radios. The back ground static need
s help!!
Wayne
N123WL
-- n5pb(at)aol.com wrote:
Jim, Although I don't "say" much, I read this every day....I start my bu
ild on Sept 15 at Shelbyville. I pretty much have my panel laid out and
the paint scheme completed, but I want to review it with the profession
als at SYI.
Howmany hours do you have on your bird now?
I'm looking forward to the day I fly mine. (Oct/Nov-hopefully)
Bear
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Langley <pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 2:15 pm
Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Wow, it got quiet really quick! (I'm feeling a little lonely...)It's tim
e to go back to school! Get the latest trends and gadgets that make the
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
============
____________________________________________________________
Click to begin your health care training online. Request info today.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oIq82OlcBcw0fHy4zKo2W
VTYIBQUYoudCuUcVMWfZdMLiVd/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Another long distance arrival ... |
| From: | "Caithness Manor" <stay(at)caithness.com.au> |
Congrats Wayne on the new arrival. A few observations - now we know why people
in WA are always lost - all the street signs are nailed to your garage walls!
My wife reckons I can now order my Lightning because the timber in the packing
crate will light our wood fires for a year or two, definitely a worthwhile
investment! And where are the photos of all the other Serpentine kits? Good
luck with the build, cheers. Paul Smith, Angaston (SA)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=198876#198876
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Laurie Hoffman <lozhoffman(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tie down points - 3 pictures for you |
Hi pete,
Glenn Maclean said he called in not long back and was very impressed wkith your
aircraft. How's it all going?
Laurie 02 46531233 0425 703226
--- On Sat, 6/21/08, Peter and Jan Disher wrote:
> From: Peter and Jan Disher <pjdisher(at)bigpond.com>
> Subject: Lightning-List: Tie down points - 3 pictures for you
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Saturday, June 21, 2008, 1:50 AM
> Hi Tex, just a few shots as to what I did, bent some 1/8
> angle and fixed them to the main spar in the area of the
> aileron bell crank, and used SS "I" bolts.
> Pete D
> VH-PDI
> Kit #30
>
>
> You have been sent 3 pictures.
>
> IMG_5584.JPG
> IMG_5586.JPG
> IMG_5049.JPG
>
> These pictures were sent with Picasa, from Google.
> Try it out here: http://picasa.google.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Laurie Hoffman <lozhoffman(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Tie down points - 3 pictures for you |
Apologies all. I didnt mean to send this to the list.
Laurie 02 46531233 0425 703226
--- On Fri, 8/15/08, Laurie Hoffman wrote:
> From: Laurie Hoffman <lozhoffman(at)yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Tie down points - 3 pictures for you
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Friday, August 15, 2008, 9:23 PM
>
>
> Hi pete,
> Glenn Maclean said he called in not long back and was very
> impressed wkith your aircraft. How's it all going?
>
> Laurie 02 46531233 0425 703226
>
>
> --- On Sat, 6/21/08, Peter and Jan Disher
> wrote:
>
> > From: Peter and Jan Disher
>
> > Subject: Lightning-List: Tie down points - 3 pictures
> for you
> > To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> > Date: Saturday, June 21, 2008, 1:50 AM
> > Hi Tex, just a few shots as to what I did, bent some
> 1/8
> > angle and fixed them to the main spar in the area of
> the
> > aileron bell crank, and used SS "I" bolts.
> > Pete D
> > VH-PDI
> > Kit #30
> >
> >
> > You have been sent 3 pictures.
> >
> > IMG_5584.JPG
> > IMG_5586.JPG
> > IMG_5049.JPG
> >
> > These pictures were sent with Picasa, from Google.
> > Try it out here: http://picasa.google.com/
>
>
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: It sure is quiet in here |
Wayne,
What radio do you have in it?? I intend to put the Garmin SL30 in mine.
-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Lenox <waynelenox(at)juno.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:37 pm
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Bear
I started my Lightning on May 12 and it was in the air on June 27th.? Mark, Nick
and Mike will help you through your build and?know what they are doing.? You
will need another month to finish your 40 hrs and complete your build.? Have
fun with your new Lightning.? I have the 40hrs+ on mine and the only real problem
is the radios.? The back ground static needs help!!
Wayne
N123WL
-- n5pb(at)aol.com wrote:
Jim, Although?I don't "say" much, I read this every day....I start my build on
Sept 15 at Shelbyville.? I pretty much have my panel laid out and the paint scheme
completed, but I want to review it with the professionals at SYI.
Howmany hours do you have on your bird now?
I'm looking forward to the day I fly mine. (Oct/Nov-hopefully)
Bear
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Langley <pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 2:15 pm
Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Wow, it got quiet really quick!
?
(I'm feeling a little lonely...)
It's time to go back to school! Get the latest trends and gadgets that make the
grade on AOL Shopping.
===================================
ist">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
===================================
tronics.com
===================================
www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
____________________________________________________________
Click to begin your health care training online. Request info today.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: It sure is quiet in here |
Jim,
I'm going to try to make it to the 2nd annual fly-in.=C2- I might have to
drive though and would have to take off friday and monday...don't know if I
can get away with it since I'm going to be tight on my vacation days which w
ill be used towards the build...hopefullly I'll be able to work something ou
t.
bear
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Langley <pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:09 pm
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Hey Bear, this is for sure an exciting time for you; and us too!=C2- The g
uys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft, and you will learn
a ton, which is what it is all about.=C2-
=C2-
We have about 3 hours on my lightning.=C2- (Oshkosh got in the way), but I
am going down to Green Landings this weekend to work and hopefully fly.=C2
- Ryan is putting the first few hours on the airplane to =9Cshake ou
t=9D any of the wrinkles before I get in it. =C2-He is much more exp
erienced in this airplane thant I am in case of some failure.
=C2-
I hope to meet up with you at the Shelbyville fly-in?
=C2-
Jim!
=C2-
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list
-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of n5pb(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 8:55 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
=C2-
Jim, Although=C2-I don't "say" much, I read this every day....I start my b
uild on
Sept 15 at Shelbyville.=C2- I pretty much have my panel laid out and the p
aint scheme completed, but I want to review it with the professionals at SYI
.
Howmany hours do you have on your bird now?
I'm looking forward to the day I fly mine. (Oct/Nov-hopefully)
Bear
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Langley <pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 2:15 pm
Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Wow, it got quiet really quick!
=C2-
(I'm feeling a little lonely...)
=C2-
=C2-
=C2-
It's time to go back to school! Get the latest trends and gadgets that make
the grade on AOL Shopping.
=C2-
=C2-
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
=C2-
-= - The Lightning-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
-========================
-= - MATRONI
CS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-========================
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: It sure is quiet in here |
Wayne,
Yea, I know the SYI team is a great group of folks.? I'm looking forward to the
build and working with Mark, Mike and Nick.? Do yo9u have an interior shot of
you aircraft?? I saw the photo of the paint scheme on the lightning webpage...very
nice...
Bear - N82PB
-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Lenox <waynelenox(at)juno.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:37 pm
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Bear
I started my Lightning on May 12 and it was in the air on June 27th.? Mark, Nick
and Mike will help you through your build and?know what they are doing.? You
will need another month to finish your 40 hrs and complete your build.? Have
fun with your new Lightning.? I have the 40hrs+ on mine and the only real problem
is the radios.? The back ground static needs help!!
Wayne
N123WL
-- n5pb(at)aol.com wrote:
Jim, Although?I don't "say" much, I read this every day....I start my build on
Sept 15 at Shelbyville.? I pretty much have my panel laid out and the paint scheme
completed, but I want to review it with the professionals at SYI.
Howmany hours do you have on your bird now?
I'm looking forward to the day I fly mine. (Oct/Nov-hopefully)
Bear
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Langley <pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 2:15 pm
Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Wow, it got quiet really quick!
?
(I'm feeling a little lonely...)
It's time to go back to school! Get the latest trends and gadgets that make the
grade on AOL Shopping.
===================================
ist">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
===================================
tronics.com
===================================
www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
____________________________________________________________
Click to begin your health care training online. Request info today.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)earthlink.net> |
Buzz, here are some suggestions for the news letter.
Have the guys from B&B give some tips on installing the apolstery kits
for the lightning.
Have Mark or Moose tell us the latest tricks they have come up with in
th shop. ( I spent 20 minutes talking with Mosse at Osh and he explained
a few new ways of doing things)
Nick could tell us of new things that pop up at the factory which we
will never hear of but might be the cure to a problem we have.
We need a regular service letter published and the news letter would be
the place for it.
I will keep fowarding ideas as possible and hope you can continue your
great job with the news letter. I know its alot of work with no pay but
more value to us than can be explained.
Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Lenox" <waynelenox(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Re: It sure is quiet in here |
I have the Garmin SL30 in my Lightning.
Wayne
-- n5pb(at)aol.com wrote:
Wayne,
What radio do you have in it? I intend to put the Garmin SL30 in mine.
-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Lenox <waynelenox(at)juno.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:37 pm
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
BearI started my Lightning on May 12 and it was in the air on June 27th.
Mark, Nick and Mike will help you through your build and know what the
y are doing. You will need another month to finish your 40 hrs and comp
lete your build. Have fun with your new Lightning. I have the 40hrs+ o
n mine and the only real problem is the radios. The back ground static
needs help!!WayneN123WL
-- n5pb(at)aol.com wrote:
Jim, Although I don't "say" much, I read this every day....I start my bu
ild on Sept 15 at Shelbyville. I pretty much have my panel laid out and
the paint scheme completed, but I want to review it with the profession
als at SYI.
Howmany hours do you have on your bird now?
I'm looking forward to the day I fly mine. (Oct/Nov-hopefully)
Bear
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Langley <pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 2:15 pm
Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Wow, it got quiet really quick! (I'm feeling a little lonely...)It's tim
e to go back to school! Get the latest trends and gadgets that make the
grade on AOL Shopping. =================
===================ist">http://www
.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List===========
========================
=tronics.com====================
================www.matronics.com/contri
bution======================
=============
____________________________________________________________
Click to begin your health care training online. Request info today.
It's time to go back to school! Get the latest trends and gadgets that m
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
===============
____________________________________________________________
Click to find the latest solutions to enhance your small business.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3m7tD8ZGfO2gNkpgWlS9iN
u2mNdKeHswSbnBjchwT80u6KQr/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve <stevesrolling(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA |
"The guys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft"
...and-we wonder why the FAA is cracking down on builder assist operation
s.... with Lightning not even grandfathered in on the existing sham-51% l
ist (who screwed that up? Too late to get on now.), expect some badged visi
tors if you keep up this line of chatter on a public forum.-
-
Homebuilt needs to mean just that again, as it did before greed and-nouve
au riche-pilots-arrived on the scene.--
-
Arion needs to produce genuine-SLSA or, better yet for starters,-the le
gitimately minimal (as in 1%)-builder completion ELSA (carrying no commer
cial use and some other harmless restrictions). Is Arion working to get ELS
A status on the climb prop, no fairings, long wing version of this magnific
ent aircraft?--If so what is ETA and if not, why not?
-
The friendly ASTM approval process could not be simpler.- Just publish a
manual and promise to build according to the plans you submit from the firs
t one you build,... and you're an aircraft manufacturer with the phone ring
ing off the wall and the cash register jumping off the counter.- Caveat E
mptor but at least ethically solid... unlike experimental-registered-"hom
ebuilt" retractable turbines where the heaviest lifting the owner/builder d
oes is hoisting-their Mont Blanc Meisterst=FCck-to sign-the checks.
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA |
In a message dated 8/17/2008 4:22:20 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
stevesrolling(at)yahoo.com writes:
"The guys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft"
...and we wonder why the FAA is cracking down on builder assist
operations.... with Lightning not even grandfathered in on the existing sha
m 51% list
(who screwed that up? Too late to get on now.), expect some badged visitors
if
you keep up this line of chatter on a public forum.
Homebuilt needs to mean just that again, as it did before greed and nouveau
riche pilots arrived on the scene.
Arion needs to produce genuine SLSA or, better yet for starters, the
legitimately minimal (as in 1%) builder completion ELSA (carrying no commer
cial use
and some other harmless restrictions). Is Arion working to get ELSA status
on
the climb prop, no fairings, long wing version of this magnificent aircraft
?
If so what is ETA and if not, why not?
The friendly ASTM approval process could not be simpler. Just publish a
manual and promise to build according to the plans you submit from the firs
t one
you build,... and you're an aircraft manufacturer with the phone ringing of
f
the wall and the cash register jumping off the counter. Caveat Emptor but
at least ethically solid... unlike experimental-registered "homebuilt"
retractable turbines where the heaviest lifting the owner/builder does is h
oisting
their Mont Blanc Meisterst=FCck to sign the checks.
Just taking a break from writing editorials for the New York Times? Or
perhaps you are drinking the Kool-Aid of Big Brother?
What is not considered, IMHO, is safety. It is no secret that more comple
x
planes are being built. Since "factory" airplanes with high tech
performance are too expensive, the buyers turn to homebuilt designs. Those
of us who
have toured the Lightning factory have seen the excellent molding of critic
al
parts. To achieve the strength and weight of those parts is simply
impossible in your garage. To downgrade any part of that is at the cost o
f safety.
I think the changes in the 51% rule will come at the expense of safety.
I also think that the other issue is time. "Builder assist" in whatever
form is popular because few people want to spend 10 years building their fi
rst
airplane. Why should you spend 80% of your build time doing repetitive tas
ks?
Why should you spend 40-80 hours sanding and painting if you are not good
at either? Why not give a local body shop $6,000 and be done with it? T
he
result will be fewer airplanes and fewer pilots. Something we dont need.
The real cause of the policy making was not the Lightning, but the turbines
,
jets and huge piston engined birds. Once again, the Govament is using
nuclear warheads to swat flies.
BTW, Another problem arises with the SLSA. The speed limit. True some wil
l
want the long wings and reduced speeds. But others will want to go fast.
Then it has to be amateur built.
By the way, we have "badged visitors" who are Lightning owners and owners.
No worries, mate.
Doug Koenigsberg
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut
00030000000007 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | It sure is quiet in here |
Good luck in making it. I did not make the first one and hope to do so
this year. I also may have to go by other means than my Lightning if I
don=99t get my hours flown off in time.
Jim!
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
n5pb(at)aol.com
Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Jim,
I'm going to try to make it to the 2nd annual fly-in. I might have to
drive though and would have to take off friday and monday...don't know
if I can get away with it since I'm going to be tight on my vacation
days which will be used towards the build...hopefullly I'll be able to
work something out.
bear
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Langley <pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:09 pm
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Hey Bear, this is for sure an exciting time for you; and us too! The
guys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft, and you will
learn a ton, which is what it is all about.
We have about 3 hours on my lightning. (Oshkosh got in the way), but I
am going down to Green Landings this weekend to work and hopefully fly.
Ryan is putting the first few hours on the airplane to =9Csh ake
out=9D any of the wrinkles before I get in it. He is much more
experienced in this airplane thant I am in case of some failure.
I hope to meet up with you at the Shelbyville fly-in?
Jim!
From: <mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com>
owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [
mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
n5pb(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 8:55 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: It sure is quie t in here
Jim, Although I don't "say" much, I read this every day....I start my
build on Sept 15 at Shelbyville. I pretty much have my panel laid out
and the paint scheme completed, but I want to review it with the
professionals at SYI.
Howmany hours do you have on your bird now?
I'm looking forward to the day I fly mine. (Oct/Nov-hopefully)
Bear
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Langley < <mailto:pequeajim(at)gmail.com> pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 2:15 pm
Subject: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Wow, it got quiet really quick!
(I'm feeling a little lonely...)
_____
It's time to go back to school! Get the latest trends and gadgets that
make the grade on
<http://shopping.aol.com/back-to-school?ncid=aolins00050000000007> AOL
Shopping.
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
<http://forums.matronics.com/> http://forums.matronics.com
<http://www.matronics.com/contribution>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
://forums.matronics.com
lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
_____
It's time to go back to school! Get the latest trends and gadgets that
make the grade on
<http://shopping.aol.com/back-to-school?ncid=aolins00050000000007> AOL
Shopping.
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | IFLYSMODEL(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: It sure is quiet in here |
Hey Guys: I hope to make it too. But as usual, I did not write down the
date.is it the 20 th or the 27 th?
My bird is supposed to fly this week, but we shall see.
Lynn
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve <stevesrolling(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA |
Yes - I am worried, DK.- Everyone should be.- After-welcoming me to t
he forum by opening-with a personal dig and apparent attempt to discredit
my post-for being "too intellectual" (only in your mind and Dubya Bush A
merica have that and a NY Times reference somehow become insults) you proce
ed to prove all my points by giving additional concrete examples of how wea
lth, sloth, and an ethics vacuum-have corrupted the Poborezny dream.- H
ell, EAA itself has been corrupted by money and power - now willing to comp
romise fifty year-standards to lure dues-paying members-thus increasing
its political clout and staff salaries and travel budgets.
-
The full certification process with its attendant Service Bulletins and ADs
-along with rigorous qualification and experience for the honor of being
an AP and IA-are what established American GA as preeminently safe throug
h the 20th century.- Homebuilding was-introduced as a limited postwar e
xception maintaining safety by ensuring owners - not the local Earl Schieb
minimum wager or drone in a Kunming plastics factory - knew their aircraft
inside out and took personal responsibility for each molecule of it.-
-
More recently Sport Pilot (incorporating-ELSA, SLSA, and-a few-qualif
ying -experimental-and classic designs) was introduced as another limit
ed exception maintaining (jury still out) safety by limiting complexity and
performance.-
-
Your concept (and current practice)-of unlimited subcontracted components
-and extensive manufacturer fabrication and assembly masquerading as buil
der assist (all without performance constraints)-circumvents-the intent
-of homebuilding and leaves no one responsible for safety... although the
inevitable lawsuits after accidents will pierce that fantasy soon enough (
and potentially shutter Shelbyville).- More significantly,-your concept
-mocks the true foundation of aviation traditions and-safety: (full dis
closure, honesty, and privileges based on ability not wallet) while punishi
ng legitimate American manufacturers financially by destroying their market
place.
-
Everyone's needs can be met within the current system without losing respec
t for aviation or sacrificing personal integrity (understanding that is not
much of a sacrifice for fastbuck artists).--The low budget-and/or tr
aditional hobbyists-can-design and build-from scratch up to the limit
s of their budget and actual personal ability...not beyond.--For a litt
le more money and/or with less skill and time required, there is ELSA.-Li
ghtning is right now ready for that with little more than a postcard to AST
M. -At twice the price, one can get in the same airspace immediately via
SLSA. SLSA-trades no formal medical certification or builder participatio
n-for compensatory enhanced safety-based performance-constraints (VFR d
ay with limits on-weight-and seats-plus-max cruise and stall speeds
). -
-
If high rollers can demonstrate a sufficient market segment exists, then Ar
ion and others will-manufacture legitimate certified high performance des
igns like SwiftFury or some personal luxury variant of Mooney with the ulti
mate trophy being a good used Mustang.
-
If as you seem to suggest there are atypically lazy and wealthy FAA Inspect
ors turning a blind eye to expensive sham builder assist because it gets th
em into the air faster (both build time and IAS) and cheaper than following
the-rules, then our industry has found its own-pederast priests.
-
-
-
G'day=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pete Krotje" <pete(at)flylightning.net> |
| Subject: | Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA |
Steve,
You are really displaying your lack of knowledge of the ASTM standards and
the process needed to prove compliance with those standards. Perhaps in the
world of some aircraft producers the process involves nothing more than
signing a few documents stating that the aircraft complies and "mailing in
the postcard". Those companies are located overseas and have no fear of
American lawyers bringing liability lawsuits against them. Some companies
seem to feel no obligation to meet the ASTM requirements.
Arion Aircraft will not fall into that group of LSA producers. If we ever
apply for S-LSA status you can be assured that we will have tested and
documented the Lightning to demonstrate compliance to every paragraph of the
applicable ASTM standards. We won't just send a postcard. We will have
proved that the landing gear will stand up to a load factor of 2 multiplied
by the required safety factor of 1.5 coupled with a side loading of 1.8
multiplied by a safety factor of 1.5. Do you think that a few of the
leading LSA suppliers tested and documented that requirement when 1 out of
ten of their aircraft have demonstrated gear collapse? Should we just
"mail it in" and let you the consumer deal with it when things are not
right? I'd bet you would have your attorney on us in a minute yet you
advocate just mailing a postcard!
Take a look at the POH and maintenance manuals of many of the LSA producers.
They are a joke but someone signed that they comply with ASTM F2483. If
Arion Aircraft enters the LSA market we will not be a "joke" and nothing
about our LSA offering will be so. Rest assured when we "Mail in the
postcard" it will be after we spend the hundreds of thousands of dollars
necessary to demonstrate that we comply.
As to builder assist - Arion is completely within the spirit and letter of
the rule as it stands now. No one knows what the final rule will look like
and the FAA will revise their original NPRM substantially after the comment
period ends Sept 30.
I think one of the major points that needs addressing in the amateur built
rules is willingness of builders to lie about their involvement in the
project. When builders sign a 8130-12 after building a Glastar (a 3500 hour
build project) in the TWO WEEKS TO TAXI program they are making a fraudulent
statement. There is no way that the 80 hours they spend gets them more than
cursory involvement in that project. Contrast that with Arion's build
assist where the builder is actively involved in every part of the
construction. Our builders are exhausted at the end of each week but they
know everything about their aircraft.
But perhaps I'm talking about the same problem whether it is amateur built
or S-LSA. There always have been and always will be those who are willing
to lie in a notarized document - who are willing to "Mail the postcard"
without doing the work. It is behavior and integrity (or lack of) that
causes the problem. For the problem of those willing to "Mail the postcard"
I have no cure. I can only assure you that Arion Aircraft will not be a
part of that group.
Pete Krotje
Arion Aircraft, LLC
931-680-1781
www.flylightning.net
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 2:33 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA
Yes - I am worried, DK. Everyone should be. After welcoming me to the
forum by opening with a personal dig and apparent attempt to discredit my
post for being "too intellectual" (only in your mind and Dubya Bush America
have that and a NY Times reference somehow become insults) you proceed to
prove all my points by giving additional concrete examples of how wealth,
sloth, and an ethics vacuum have corrupted the Poborezny dream. Hell, EAA
itself has been corrupted by money and power - now willing to compromise
fifty year standards to lure dues-paying members thus increasing its
political clout and staff salaries and travel budgets.
The full certification process with its attendant Service Bulletins and ADs
along with rigorous qualification and experience for the honor of being an
AP and IA are what established American GA as preeminently safe through the
20th century. Homebuilding was introduced as a limited postwar exception
maintaining safety by ensuring owners - not the local Earl Schieb minimum
wager or drone in a Kunming plastics factory - knew their aircraft inside
out and took personal responsibility for each molecule of it.
More recently Sport Pilot (incorporating ELSA, SLSA, and a few qualifying
experimental and classic designs) was introduced as another limited
exception maintaining (jury still out) safety by limiting complexity and
performance.
Your concept (and current practice) of unlimited subcontracted components
and extensive manufacturer fabrication and assembly masquerading as builder
assist (all without performance constraints) circumvents the intent of
homebuilding and leaves no one responsible for safety... although the
inevitable lawsuits after accidents will pierce that fantasy soon enough
(and potentially shutter Shelbyville). More significantly, your concept
mocks the true foundation of aviation traditions and safety: (full
disclosure, honesty, and privileges based on ability not wallet) while
punishing legitimate American manufacturers financially by destroying their
marketplace.
Everyone's needs can be met within the current system without losing respect
for aviation or sacrificing personal integrity (understanding that is not
much of a sacrifice for fastbuck artists). The low budget and/or
traditional hobbyists can design and build from scratch up to the limits of
their budget and actual personal ability...not beyond. For a little more
money and/or with less skill and time required, there is ELSA. Lightning is
right now ready for that with little more than a postcard to ASTM. At twice
the price, one can get in the same airspace immediately via SLSA. SLSA
trades no formal medical certification or builder participation for
compensatory enhanced safety-based performance constraints (VFR day with
limits on weight and seats plus max cruise and stall speeds).
If high rollers can demonstrate a sufficient market segment exists, then
Arion and others will manufacture legitimate certified high performance
designs like SwiftFury or some personal luxury variant of Mooney with the
ultimate trophy being a good used Mustang.
If as you seem to suggest there are atypically lazy and wealthy FAA
Inspectors turning a blind eye to expensive sham builder assist because it
gets them into the air faster (both build time and IAS) and cheaper than
following the rules, then our industry has found its own pederast priests.
G'day
D========================
=========
D========================
=========
D========================
=========
D========================
=========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
In a message dated 8/15/2008 1:07:05 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
playgoldg(at)hotmail.com writes:
Someone should list a lightning in that contest for next year, or is there
something I don't get?
Yhol,
I agree, and suggested that some time ago. However, not having seen the
actual rules for the NASA GA Technology Challenge , there may be some other
requirements that I am not aware of. Of course, like any contest or
challenge, there are always some "out of pocket" expenses that could easily run
up
the cost of such a venture. We need someone like Earl Ferguson (the Lightning
world record holder) to accept the challenge, research the rules, plan the
attempt, and "make it happen". How about it, Earl?
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)aol.com |
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
Thanks, Tex, I have forwarded to Nick and Mark.
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
| Subject: | Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA |
To group,
I think we have covered this subject many times. The Approved List is
not a
prerequisite for a AWC or inspection for a EAB aircraft, it only makes
determining the =93Major Portion=94 easier for the DAR and the
inspection. If
you want to prove you built the aircraft keep very detailed builders
logs,
photos , notes . ect this will prove your case as with any EAB. The
Aircraft
did not make it on the list prior to the suspension of evaluations
because
it was too new of a kit to be evaluated and we did not have all items
needed
for that evaluation. So not a matter of screwing anything up just
dealing
with the speed of the FAA, anyone who has applied for a AWC knows they
do
not work fast. Now, Ask any one of the customers who have come to build
with
Us in TN and they will tell you this is not a vacation and we are not
building your aircraft for you in any way. We are here to help you
organize
your building time and take care of much of the head scratching which
goes
on while building. Although deemed simple or friendly by those who have
not
worked with it, the ASTM standards are much different that you think.
You
can not just simply build one and say that it complies, than go off
building
them. There are miles of standards to comply with thru testing or
computations, than design control and tracking of every single part you
make
(not needed by a kit manufacturer) and that in fact is the right part
out of
the approved fixture of mold. I could go on for hours here, I think
there
are several LSA manufactures who did just that signed on the line with
out
regards to standards. Just building and promising to comply or build to
the
plans sounds just like a different version of what your problem is
above.
The Lightning kit does meet the current 51% rule as the new proposed one
is
not in effect. And the proposed rule should not prove any problems for
the
current kit either. We have run thru the evaluation list several times,
from
several different people and continue to come up with about 56% builder
44%
manufacture and well with in the 20% requirements for fabrication and
assembly. As far as our plans for a SLSA or an ELSA keep our above
mentioned
experiences with the standards in mind.
I would and so would all greatly appreciate to know whom is posting to
the
list by a =93 simple=94 signature.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 3:21 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA
"The guys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft"
...and we wonder why the FAA is cracking down on builder assist
operations.... with Lightning not even grandfathered in on the existing
sham
51% list (who screwed that up? Too late to get on now.), expect some
badged
visitors if you keep up this line of chatter on a public forum.
Homebuilt needs to mean just that again, as it did before greed and
nouveau
riche pilots arrived on the scene.
Arion needs to produce genuine SLSA or, better yet for starters, the
legitimately minimal (as in 1%) builder completion ELSA (carrying no
commercial use and some other harmless restrictions). Is Arion working
to
get ELSA status on the climb prop, no fairings, long wing version of
this
magnificent aircraft? If so what is ETA and if not, why not?
The friendly ASTM approval process could not be simpler. Just publish a
manual and promise to build according to the plans you submit from the
first
one you build,... and you're an aircraft manufacturer with the phone
ringing
off the wall and the cash register jumping off the counter. Caveat
Emptor
but at least ethically solid... unlike experimental-registered
"homebuilt"
retractable turbines where the heaviest lifting the owner/builder does
is
hoisting their Mont Blanc Meisterst=FCck to sign the checks.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
| Subject: | It sure is quiet in here |
The bird should fly this week and most likely fly Tuesday weather
permitting. July and august are very time consuming. Get ready for EAA, go
to EAA , try to find and unpack your stuff from it too. We are back in shop
now and in full swing so rest assured emaisl will get answered and phone
calls too, we may even get to do some flying.
nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com
Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2008 8:56 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: It sure is quiet in here
Hey Guys: I hope to make it too. But as usual, I did not write down the
date.is it the 20 th or the 27 th?
My bird is supposed to fly this week, but we shall see.
Lynn
_____
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read
<http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00
030000000007> reviews on AOL Autos.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | EAFerguson(at)AOL.COM |
Somebody in a Lightning came thru Winder Ga (WDR) where some of my friends
are based . Light metallic blue base color. Owner told my friend it was Kit
#34. I don't recall any builders using this base color. And I can't find my
owner's list.
Who are you? Why didn't you call?
Earl Ferguson
Atlanta (FTY)
404-667-1065
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mefford, Walt" <walt.mefford(at)garmin.com> |
According to the list in the newsletter, #34 was shipped to Australia.
Walt M.
N881WP
#55
________________________________
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
EAFerguson(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 6:54 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Kit # 34?
Somebody in a Lightning came thru Winder Ga (WDR) where some of my
friends are based . Light metallic blue base color. Owner told my friend
it was Kit #34. I don't recall any builders using this base color. And I
can't find my owner's list.
Who are you? Why didn't you call?
Earl Ferguson
Atlanta (FTY)
404-667-1065
________________________________
Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read
reviews on AOL Autos
<http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aol
a
ut00030000000007> .
-------------------------
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended
recipient, please be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or
use of this e-mail or any attachment is prohibited. If you have received
this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
Thank you for your cooperation
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
In a message dated 8/18/2008 9:54:55 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
EAFerguson(at)aol.com writes:
Owner told my friend it was Kit #34.
Earl,
How good are your friends eyes (light metalic blue base color) and his
memory (kit # 34)? Just kidding, but the owners list says kit # 34 belongs to
John Chesbrough from Australia. John was in Oshkosh, but as of that time
his kit was not flying. It would be interesting to find out what he actually
saw and what color it really was. As far as I know there are no light blue
Lightnings flying. There is one is light gray primer that looks like a
military fighter, but I don't think it has been in Georgia.
Blue Skies,
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Moving forward with flight testing for N730AL |
We did some additional flight testing on N730AL this past Saturday. I must
say that my engineering side enjoys evaluating the aircraft and fine tuning
things. The airspeed reading was not correct, as well as RPM. The MGL
Odyssey is so easy to program, it made things very easy to fix. another
thing that needed to be fine tuned were all the alarm limits for pressure,
temp and such.
Ryan: I hope i didn't run down the battery too much. I was having so much
fun, I lost trac of time in the cockpit.
Lots of fun. I will have an update to my test log on my site this week, as
well as video updates on the multimedia page. In the mean time, here are a
couple of teasers on YouTube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xpgqYyEuo4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYT-2NNBZ4U
Jim!
N730AL
www.jimslightning.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve <stevesrolling(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA |
PK, thanks for the righteous indignation and quality control.... on my post
and daily in your facility.- I don't think anyone assumed you can litera
lly send a postcard to ASTM and be a manufacturer but-knew-instead-th
at expression-was symbolic of the-contrast between the straightforward
simplistic paperwork required to submit an existing, tested, and in use exp
erimental design for ASTM ELSA or SLSA approval vs the millions of dollars
and years of engineering and political effort required to get full certific
ation of a standard category production aircraft from OK City.
-
Obviously the strength and reliability of the airframe and the company behi
nd it will vary in this-young, still-loosey goosey process and you clea
rly strive to lead the pack.- Caveat emptor.- Same individual variation
goes for compliance with the letter and intent of the amateur experimental
-regulations.- The comments of builders here (I have not been to your h
eadquarters but plan to visit ASAP)-DO suggest you are walking a thin lin
e (clearly crossed by those others you mention) with your current builder a
ssist practices and indisputably you missed an opportunity by not getting o
n the 51% list when that was a slam dunk process. -CZAW (your closest com
petition in airframe and price-terms but-not even in your league when i
t comes to management honesty and customer relations) actually advertised t
hey were on that list when they weren't.- Scumbuckets.
-
I will put my money where my mouth is the day after you announce ELSA appro
val-for a kit that does not require an all thumbs guy like me to do more
than bolt-together some big parts and maybe string a few clearly color co
ded wires in places a full size American can reach.- And despite your coy
ness, I expect that is going to happen before CZAW offers to actually build
and deliver the RTF aircraft I have had a deposit with them on for three y
ears now.=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | EAFerguson(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Esqual-Lightning real cruise for best MPG |
In a message dated 8/18/2008 12:33:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM writes:
I agree, and suggested that some time ago. However, not having seen the
actual rules for the NASA GA Technology Challenge , there may be some other
requirements that I am not aware of. Of course, like any contest or
challenge, there are always some "out of pocket" expenses that could easily run
up
the cost of such a venture. We need someone like Earl Ferguson (the Lightning
world record holder) to accept the challenge, research the rules, plan the
attempt, and "make it happen". How about it, Earl?
Buz
All,
I'm planning a presentation on record how tos and such for the gathering in
Shelbyville. Ya'll come.
Earl
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
| Subject: | Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA |
To Group,
This list is reserved for discussions about the lightning Kit, how it goes
together, tricks on building, do's and don'ts, you get my point. So I would
ask that we keep it for that and not fill our email boxes with junk. If you
want to discuss policies and rules do that on the FAA list if they have one.
If you want to talk about business practices take it up with MR. Trump. As
for your morals and indecencies call Oprah. But keep this list for people
who are building, flying and or thinking about the Lightning kit as there
next project.
Nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 11:09 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA
PK, thanks for the righteous indignation and quality control.... on my post
and daily in your facility. I don't think anyone assumed you can literally
send a postcard to ASTM and be a manufacturer but knew instead that
expression was symbolic of the contrast between the straightforward
simplistic paperwork required to submit an existing, tested, and in use
experimental design for ASTM ELSA or SLSA approval vs the millions of
dollars and years of engineering and political effort required to get full
certification of a standard category production aircraft from OK City.
Obviously the strength and reliability of the airframe and the company
behind it will vary in this young, still loosey goosey process and you
clearly strive to lead the pack. Caveat emptor. Same individual variation
goes for compliance with the letter and intent of the amateur experimental
regulations. The comments of builders here (I have not been to your
headquarters but plan to visit ASAP) DO suggest you are walking a thin line
(clearly crossed by those others you mention) with your current builder
assist practices and indisputably you missed an opportunity by not getting
on the 51% list when that was a slam dunk process. CZAW (your closest
competition in airframe and price terms but not even in your league when it
comes to management honesty and customer relations) actually advertised they
were on that list when they weren't. Scumbuckets.
I will put my money where my mouth is the day after you announce ELSA
approval for a kit that does not require an all thumbs guy like me to do
more than bolt together some big parts and maybe string a few clearly color
coded wires in places a full size American can reach. And despite your
coyness, I expect that is going to happen before CZAW offers to actually
build and deliver the RTF aircraft I have had a deposit with them on for
three years now.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA |
| From: | "Mefford, Walt" <walt.mefford(at)garmin.com> |
Right on!
N881WP
Walt M.
________________________________
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
flylightning
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 9:49 AM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA
To Group,
This list is reserved for discussions about the lightning Kit, how it
goes together, tricks on building, do's and don'ts, you get my point. So
I would ask that we keep it for that and not fill our email boxes with
junk. If you want to discuss policies and rules do that on the FAA list
if they have one. If you want to talk about business practices take it
up with MR. Trump. As for your morals and indecencies call Oprah. But
keep this list for people who are building, flying and or thinking about
the Lightning kit as there next project.
Nick
________________________________
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 11:09 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA
PK, thanks for the righteous indignation and quality control.... on my
post and daily in your facility. I don't think anyone assumed you can
literally send a postcard to ASTM and be a manufacturer but knew instead
that expression was symbolic of the contrast between the straightforward
simplistic paperwork required to submit an existing, tested, and in use
experimental design for ASTM ELSA or SLSA approval vs the millions of
dollars and years of engineering and political effort required to get
full certification of a standard category production aircraft from OK
City.
Obviously the strength and reliability of the airframe and the company
behind it will vary in this young, still loosey goosey process and you
clearly strive to lead the pack. Caveat emptor. Same individual
variation goes for compliance with the letter and intent of the amateur
experimental regulations. The comments of builders here (I have not
been to your headquarters but plan to visit ASAP) DO suggest you are
walking a thin line (clearly crossed by those others you mention) with
your current builder assist practices and indisputably you missed an
opportunity by not getting on the 51% list when that was a slam dunk
process. CZAW (your closest competition in airframe and price terms but
not even in your league when it comes to management honesty and customer
relations) actually advertised they were on that list when they weren't.
Scumbuckets.
I will put my money where my mouth is the day after you announce ELSA
approval for a kit that does not require an all thumbs guy like me to do
more than bolt together some big parts and maybe string a few clearly
color coded wires in places a full size American can reach. And despite
your coyness, I expect that is going to happen before CZAW offers to
actually build and deliver the RTF aircraft I have had a deposit with
them on for three years now.
-------------------------
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended
recipient, please be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or
use of this e-mail or any attachment is prohibited. If you have received
this e-mail in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
Thank you for your cooperation
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA |
I had written a "nice" response to stevesrolling (see below) but had not
sent yet as I wanted to "let it set a while" then re-read what I had written
before putting it out to the list. However, after reading his latest post, I
am
convinced he is actually just a "troll" looking to get his jollies by
creating controversy. On his three post he has tried to create "issues" where
none
really exist as to the Lightning and Arion Aircraft. So, "Mr. Troll", if
you are for real, provide a name and address, ask some valid questions that
have to do with building or flying the Lightning, and you will receive the
respect of the Lightning listers. If you are truly waiting for an SLSA or ELSA
Lightning because you are an "all thumbs guy", then why "bad mouth" a company
you really know nothing about? Your answer to the above (if in fact you do
answer) will show whether you really are just a troll.
Blue Skies, but check 6,
Buz Rich
Hello stevesrolling,
I don't think I have seen your email address on the Lightning list
before, so welcome aboard. However, in order to know who we are corresponding
with, most of us sign our names so that we can become acquainted with each other
and develop a kind of friendly relationship. It is also nice to know where
you are from so list members near your location might be able to share their
experiences and even provide a flight or a look at their project.
I have read both of your recent post several times, and try as I might,
I am having a hard time understanding exactly what point you are trying to
get across. In fact, I am not entirely sure you aren't just a "troll" looking
to create some controversy. But whatever your reason for posting, I
certainly do agree with your opening comment that someone saying "The guys in
Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft" might possibly be misleading
to
anyone unfamiliar with the SYI operation; causing them to think that "your
aircraft gets built with little real involvement by you". However, I am
certain that the person that made that statement was just being enthusiastic about
their great build experience and will certainly acknowledge that indeed they
were heavily involved in all aspects of the build.
Your comment that "Homebuilt needs to mean just that again, as it did
before greed and nouveau riche pilots arrived on the scene", is very similar to
an "attitude" that I have seen at some EAA meetings where "old timers"
(like me) who have possibly built time consuming aircraft in the past are a
little put off by progress in aircraft construction techniques that allow kits
to
be built in much less time. After giving a briefing on the construction of
my Esqual "LS" kit that took me about 5 months (I made lots of changes), I
actually had someone that had built an early Rutan design (taking many years to
complete) say that the new kits should not be allowed because they can be
built so quickly. He quickly "shut up" when I said, well I have built a Pitts
Special from plans (no kit) and an aluminum airplane (kit) and that those old
methods just take more time to complete because they are old technology.
Progress in aviation technology often starts with the homebuilt movement and
then moves to the "big boys". But when building a modern kit, you learn just
as
much using modern construction as you did in the "old days" using the "old
ways".
I do agree with some of your thoughts that over the years EAA itself may
have lost some of its initial focus on homebuilding, but that often happens
with growth in an organization that is trying to serve all of its members
interest. Yes, the big Oshkosh show has gotten big and seems to be moving more
towards a "trade show" type of environment, but it still is the best show of
its kind for homebuilding. And yes, I think the 51% rule is fine just the
way it is, the FAA just needs to enforce the current rule as it is and not
allow the "hired gun" builders or the "factory builds" that really do all the
work and the "owner" just writes the checks. The real answer is up to the DAR
to decide if the "builder", who signs his name stating that they did the work,
is telling the truth. The builders log has to be the key.
Pete and Nick have responded to your comments about ASTM standards and
any possible future SLSA Lightning, so I will refrain from adding to their
words. However, rest assured that the SYI group is "on top" of things and, busy
as they are, they have a great future mapped out for Airon Aircraft and its
customers, past, current, and future.
Blue Skies,
Buz
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007 )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA |
Nice reply Buz... Just the way ti should be, not argumentative or
insulting, but informative.
On 8/18/08, N1BZRich(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> I had written a "nice" response to stevesrolling (see below) but had not
> sent yet as I wanted to "let it set a while" then re-read what I had written
> before putting it out to the list. However, after reading his latest post,
> I am convinced he is actually just a "troll" looking to get his jollies by
> creating controversy. On his three post he has tried to create "issues"
> where none really exist as to the Lightning and Arion Aircraft. So, "Mr.
> Troll", if you are for real, provide a name and address, ask some valid
> questions that have to do with building or flying the Lightning, and you
> will receive the respect of the Lightning listers. If you are truly waiting
> for an SLSA or ELSA Lightning because you are an "all thumbs guy", then why
> "bad mouth" a company you really know nothing about? Your answer to the
> above (if in fact you do answer) will show whether you really are just a
> troll.
> Blue Skies, but check 6,
> Buz Rich
>
>
> Hello stevesrolling,
> I don't think I have seen your email address on the Lightning list
> before, so welcome aboard. However, in order to know who we are
> corresponding with, most of us sign our names so that we can become
> acquainted with each other and develop a kind of friendly relationship. It
> is also nice to know where you are from so list members near your
> location might be able to share their experiences and even provide a flight
> or a look at their project.
> I have read both of your recent post several times, and try as I might,
> I am having a hard time understanding exactly what point you are trying to
> get across. In fact, I am not entirely sure you aren't just a "troll"
> looking to create some controversy. But whatever your reason for posting,
> I certainly do agree with your opening comment that someone saying "The
> guys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft" might possibly be
> misleading to anyone unfamiliar with the SYI operation; causing them to
> think that "your aircraft gets built with little real involvement by you".
> However, I am certain that the person that made that statement was just
> being enthusiastic about their great build experience and will certainly
> acknowledge that indeed they were heavily involved in all aspects of the
> build.
> Your comment that "Homebuilt needs to mean just that again, as it did
> before greed and nouveau riche pilots arrived on the scene", is very similar
> to an "attitude" that I have seen at some EAA meetings where "old timers"
> (like me) who have possibly built time consuming aircraft in the past are a
> little put off by progress in aircraft construction techniques that allow
> kits to be built in much less time. After giving a briefing on the
> construction of my Esqual "LS" kit that took me about 5 months (I made lots
> of changes), I actually had someone that had built an early Rutan design
> (taking many years to complete) say that the new kits should not be allowed
> because they can be built so quickly. He quickly "shut up" when I said,
> well I have built a Pitts Special from plans (no kit) and an aluminum
> airplane (kit) and that those old methods just take more time to complete
> because they are old technology. Progress in aviation technology often
> starts with the homebuilt movement and then moves to the "big boys". But
> when building a modern kit, you learn just as much using modern construction
> as you did in the "old days" using the "old ways".
> I do agree with some of your thoughts that over the years EAA itself
> may have lost some of its initial focus on homebuilding, but that often
> happens with growth in an organization that is trying to serve all of its
> members interest. Yes, the big Oshkosh show has gotten big and seems to be
> moving more towards a "trade show" type of environment, but it still is the
> best show of its kind for homebuilding. And yes, I think the 51% rule is
> fine just the way it is, the FAA just needs to enforce the current rule as
> it is and not allow the "hired gun" builders or the "factory builds" that
> really do all the work and the "owner" just writes the checks. The real
> answer is up to the DAR to decide if the "builder", who signs his name
> stating that they did the work, is telling the truth. The builders log has
> to be the key.
> Pete and Nick have responded to your comments about ASTM standards and
> any possible future SLSA Lightning, so I will refrain from adding to their
> words. However, rest assured that the SYI group is "on top" of things and,
> busy as they are, they have a great future mapped out for Airon Aircraft and
> its customers, past, current, and future.
> Blue Skies,
> Buz
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews
> on AOL Autos<http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007>
> .
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA |
Now if I can just learn how to type!
On 8/18/08, Jim Langley wrote:
>
> Nice reply Buz... Just the way ti should be, not argumentative or
> insulting, but informative.
>
> On 8/18/08, N1BZRich(at)aol.com wrote:
>>
>> I had written a "nice" response to stevesrolling (see below) but had not
>> sent yet as I wanted to "let it set a while" then re-read what I had written
>> before putting it out to the list. However, after reading his latest post,
>> I am convinced he is actually just a "troll" looking to get his jollies by
>> creating controversy. On his three post he has tried to create "issues"
>> where none really exist as to the Lightning and Arion Aircraft. So, "Mr.
>> Troll", if you are for real, provide a name and address, ask some valid
>> questions that have to do with building or flying the Lightning, and you
>> will receive the respect of the Lightning listers. If you are truly waiting
>> for an SLSA or ELSA Lightning because you are an "all thumbs guy", then why
>> "bad mouth" a company you really know nothing about? Your answer to the
>> above (if in fact you do answer) will show whether you really are just a
>> troll.
>> Blue Skies, but check 6,
>> Buz Rich
>>
>>
>> Hello stevesrolling,
>> I don't think I have seen your email address on the Lightning list
>> before, so welcome aboard. However, in order to know who we are
>> corresponding with, most of us sign our names so that we can become
>> acquainted with each other and develop a kind of friendly relationship. It
>> is also nice to know where you are from so list members near your
>> location might be able to share their experiences and even provide a flight
>> or a look at their project.
>> I have read both of your recent post several times, and try as I
>> might, I am having a hard time understanding exactly what point you are
>> trying to get across. In fact, I am not entirely sure you aren't just a
>> "troll" looking to create some controversy. But whatever your reason for
>> posting, I certainly do agree with your opening comment that someone saying
>> "The guys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft" might
>> possibly be misleading to anyone unfamiliar with the SYI operation; causing
>> them to think that "your aircraft gets built with little real involvement by
>> you". However, I am certain that the person that made that statement was
>> just being enthusiastic about their great build experience and will
>> certainly acknowledge that indeed they were heavily involved in all aspects
>> of the build.
>> Your comment that "Homebuilt needs to mean just that again, as it did
>> before greed and nouveau riche pilots arrived on the scene", is very similar
>> to an "attitude" that I have seen at some EAA meetings where "old timers"
>> (like me) who have possibly built time consuming aircraft in the past are a
>> little put off by progress in aircraft construction techniques that allow
>> kits to be built in much less time. After giving a briefing on the
>> construction of my Esqual "LS" kit that took me about 5 months (I made lots
>> of changes), I actually had someone that had built an early Rutan design
>> (taking many years to complete) say that the new kits should not be allowed
>> because they can be built so quickly. He quickly "shut up" when I said,
>> well I have built a Pitts Special from plans (no kit) and an aluminum
>> airplane (kit) and that those old methods just take more time to complete
>> because they are old technology. Progress in aviation technology often
>> starts with the homebuilt movement and then moves to the "big boys". But
>> when building a modern kit, you learn just as much using modern construction
>> as you did in the "old days" using the "old ways".
>> I do agree with some of your thoughts that over the years EAA itself
>> may have lost some of its initial focus on homebuilding, but that often
>> happens with growth in an organization that is trying to serve all of its
>> members interest. Yes, the big Oshkosh show has gotten big and seems to be
>> moving more towards a "trade show" type of environment, but it still is the
>> best show of its kind for homebuilding. And yes, I think the 51% rule is
>> fine just the way it is, the FAA just needs to enforce the current rule as
>> it is and not allow the "hired gun" builders or the "factory builds" that
>> really do all the work and the "owner" just writes the checks. The real
>> answer is up to the DAR to decide if the "builder", who signs his name
>> stating that they did the work, is telling the truth. The builders log has
>> to be the key.
>> Pete and Nick have responded to your comments about ASTM standards and
>> any possible future SLSA Lightning, so I will refrain from adding to their
>> words. However, rest assured that the SYI group is "on top" of things and,
>> busy as they are, they have a great future mapped out for Airon Aircraft and
>> its customers, past, current, and future.
>> Blue Skies,
>> Buz
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read
>> reviews on AOL Autos<http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00030000000007>
>> .
>>
>> *
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
Where do you all get the clear tape that can be used to seal the wing root
gaps?
Jim!
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Service Bulletin on prop flanges |
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
> <>
Apologies if you've seen this.
I saw a 5100 Jab engine at the UK agents and it had two bolt holes
damaged and the other 4 were fine. The hub has yet to be found.
I've refitted mine with the right Loctite, the JCB heavy duty stuff I'd
used was still very tight to crack off.
Don't you just love wire locking, especially twice.
Regards, Clive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
Jim=2C
Buz can answer that=2C but it brings up a good point=2C that I've had an
article sitting=2C waiting to be finished on my results of that study. We
learned a few things during that experiment and it did make some good diffe
rence. I don't personally know you=2C but I feel like I know the kind of p
erson that you are. (and appreciate it) I don't think that I have to say
=2C but wait until you get your 40 hours and everything ironed before addin
g this would be my professional opinion. Brian W.
Date: Mon=2C 18 Aug 2008 16:44:19 -0400From: pequeajim(at)gmail.comTo: lightni
ng-list(at)matronics.comSubject: Lightning-List: Gap seal tap for Lightning wi
ng
Where do you all get the clear tape that can be used to seal the wing root
gaps?
Jim!
_________________________________________________________________
Get ideas on sharing photos from people like you. Find new ways to share.
http://www.windowslive.com/explore/photogallery/posts?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_P
hoto_Gallery_082008
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | EAFerguson(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 8/18/2008 10:05:06 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM writes:
How good are your friends eyes (light metalic blue base color) and his
memory (kit # 34)? Just kidding, but the owners list says kit # 34 belongs to
John Chesbrough from Australia. John was in Oshkosh, but as of that time his
kit was not flying. It would be interesting to find out what he actually saw
and what color it really was. As far as I know there are no light blue
Lightnings flying. There is one is light gray primer that looks like a military
fighter, but I don't think it has been in Georgia.
Blue Skies,
Buz
Suspicions confirmed.
Earl
**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA |
Now that IS on topic! I have not seen any in depth fabricating from metal
and/or fabric/wood airplanes=2C but I have seen a lot of the composites lik
e the Lightning=2C Jabiru=2C and the Lancair IV. I even saw a prototype of
a 2 seat Lancair turbine that was hot! Don't know what happened to that p
lane. I do feel good with what is coming from Buz that he considers the Li
ghtning to be a user friendly built composite airplane. I think that's whe
re the line is being drawn. Between what is fabricated and what is buildin
g an airplane. As I understand it=2C you can build 100% of some Rutan desi
gns from scratch! That's not what this plane is for. Neither was it for h
aving a preassembled aircraft. If Arion deems that they wish to go the SLS
A market then it will be because it was born out of the heritage of the exp
erimental Lightning segment. They didn't plan on having a plane where you
buy it as an experimental and then they preassemble it either. In my year
and a half or so around them I never saw anything of the sort. In fact=2C
they tried to help by being there to answer questions and tried not to lay
hands on the aircraft as much as possible. There are obviously some things
that are harder than others.
If anybody is going to have "claims" to any wrongs being done then I think
they should sign their name. Also=2C claims with admittedly no previous kn
owledge would seem to me to be as irresponsible. Yes=2C you have a good vo
cabulary=2C but you don't seem to have great people skills or a responsible
nature. Try and be a little more humble and play nice with others and you
'll find that pretty much everybody here will be more than happy to welcome
you in=2C buy you a beer=2C and forget the first impressions in favor of c
omradary! Anyhow=2C great write-up once again Buz! Brian W.
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.comDate: Mon=2C 18 Aug 2008 13:49:07 -0400Subject: Re: L
ightning-List: Time to 'fess up and produce an ELSA To: lightning-list@matr
onics.com
I had written a "nice" response to stevesrolling (see below) but had not se
nt yet as I wanted to "let it set a while" then re-read what I had written
before putting it out to the list. However=2C after reading his latest pos
t=2C I am convinced he is actually just a "troll" looking to get his jollie
s by creating controversy. On his three post he has tried to create "issue
s" where none really exist as to the Lightning and Arion Aircraft. So=2C "
Mr. Troll"=2C if you are for real=2C provide a name and address=2C ask some
valid questions that have to do with building or flying the Lightning=2C a
nd you will receive the respect of the Lightning listers. If you are truly
waiting for an SLSA or ELSA Lightning because you are an "all thumbs guy"
=2C then why "bad mouth" a company you really know nothing about? Your ans
wer to the above (if in fact you do answer) will show whether you really ar
e just a troll.
Blue Skies=2C but check 6=2C
Buz Rich
Hello stevesrolling=2C
I don't think I have seen your email address on the Lightning list befo
re=2C so welcome aboard. However=2C in order to know who we are correspond
ing with=2C most of us sign our names so that we can become acquainted with
each other and develop a kind of friendly relationship. It is also nice t
o know where you are from so list members near your location might be able
to share their experiences and even provide a flight or a look at their pro
ject.
I have read both of your recent post several times=2C and try as I migh
t=2C I am having a hard time understanding exactly what point you are tryin
g to get across. In fact=2C I am not entirely sure you aren't just a "trol
l" looking to create some controversy. But whatever your reason for postin
g=2C I certainly do agree with your opening comment that someone saying "T
he guys in Shelbyville will do a great job on your aircraft" might possibly
be misleading to anyone unfamiliar with the SYI operation=3B causing them
to think that "your aircraft gets built with little real involvement by you
". However=2C I am certain that the person that made that statement was j
ust being enthusiastic about their great build experience and will certainl
y acknowledge that indeed they were heavily involved in all aspects of the
build.
Your comment that "Homebuilt needs to mean just that again=2C as it did
before greed and nouveau riche pilots arrived on the scene"=2C is very sim
ilar to an "attitude" that I have seen at some EAA meetings where "old tim
ers" (like me) who have possibly built time consuming aircraft in the past
are a little put off by progress in aircraft construction techniques that a
llow kits to be built in much less time. After giving a briefing on the co
nstruction of my Esqual "LS" kit that took me about 5 months (I made lots o
f changes)=2C I actually had someone that had built an early Rutan design (
taking many years to complete) say that the new kits should not be allowed
because they can be built so quickly. He quickly "shut up" when I said=2C
well I have built a Pitts Special from plans (no kit) and an aluminum airpl
ane (kit) and that those old methods just take more time to complete becaus
e they are old technology. Progress in aviation technology often starts wi
th the homebuilt movement and then moves to the "big boys". But when build
ing a modern kit=2C you learn just as much using modern construction as you
did in the "old days" using the "old ways".
I do agree with some of your thoughts that over the years EAA itself ma
y have lost some of its initial focus on homebuilding=2C but that often hap
pens with growth in an organization that is trying to serve all of its memb
ers interest. Yes=2C the big Oshkosh show has gotten big and seems to be m
oving more towards a "trade show" type of environment=2C but it still is th
e best show of its kind for homebuilding. And yes=2C I think the 51% rule
is fine just the way it is=2C the FAA just needs to enforce the current rul
e as it is and not allow the "hired gun" builders or the "factory builds" t
hat really do all the work and the "owner" just writes the checks. The rea
l answer is up to the DAR to decide if the "builder"=2C who signs his name
stating that they did the work=2C is telling the truth. The builders log h
as to be the key.
Pete and Nick have responded to your comments about ASTM standards and
any possible future SLSA Lightning=2C so I will refrain from adding to thei
r words. However=2C rest assured that the SYI group is "on top" of things
and=2C busy as they are=2C they have a great future mapped out for Airon Ai
rcraft and its customers=2C past=2C current=2C and future.
Blue Skies=2C
Buz
Looking for a car that's sporty=2C fun and fits in your budget? Read review
s on AOL Autos.
_________________________________________________________________
Get thousands of games on your PC=2C your mobile phone=2C and the web with
Windows=AE.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Service Bulletin on prop flanges |
Clive=2C
Greetings to you and the UK! Did you happen to notice what the Jabiru 5
100 engine was on? Just asking b/c I can only think of one plane that had
that. It was a spitfire replica. I love the looks of a Lightning and I wo
nder what we could do if we had WWII with current aircraft technologies=2C
but it's hard to beat the looks of that Spit! The guy and story of how it
was built it just incredible as well! Brian W.
Subject: Lightning-List: Service Bulletin on prop flangesDate: Mon=2C 18 Au
s.com
<> Apologies if you've seen this.
I saw a 5100 Jab engine at the UK agents and it had two bolt holes damaged
and the other 4 were fine. The hub has yet to be found.
I've refitted mine with the right Loctite=2C the JCB heavy duty stuff I'd u
sed was still very tight to crack off. Don't you just love wire locking=2C
especially twice.
Regards=2C Clive
_________________________________________________________________
See what people are saying about Windows Live. Check out featured posts.
http://www.windowslive.com/connect?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_connect2_082008
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | You'll remember the last time this happened |
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7568045.stm
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7568045.stm>
A Europa kit plane in Germany, I'm bet he's glad he didn't build a
monowheel.
You'll recall the guy a few years back near Seattle airport.
http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=47315
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Service Bulletin on prop flanges |
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
Hi Brian, I was more interested in the flange and there were two 5100's
on the bench. I think both were from Spitfire replica's, the second one
was an overheating case I think, piston damage.
Indeed the Spitfire's looks are unbeatable and the replica's a
convincing sight, you have to be a real enthusiast though as they cost
double and RV and don't out perform one. There are at least three for
sale in the UK.
There's a new single seater over here now called a silence twister, it
has the same lines apart from the cowling, after Googling I see it's
over your way as well:
http://www.pacificaerosport.com/twister.htm
Apparently there are two about England that put on a spirited display
and because of the silhouette it has a certain magic.....
R.J.Mitchell?
Regards, Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Whittingham
Sent: 18 August 2008 23:48
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Service Bulletin on prop flanges
Clive,
Greetings to you and the UK! Did you happen to notice what the
Jabiru 5100 engine was on? Just asking b/c I can only think of one
plane that had that. It was a spitfire replica. I love the looks of a
Lightning and I wonder what we could do if we had WWII with current
aircraft technologies, but it's hard to beat the looks of that Spit!
The guy and story of how it was built it just incredible as well! Brian
W.
________________________________
Subject: Lightning-List: Service Bulletin on prop flanges
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 23:29:04 +0100
From: clive.james(at)uk.bp.com
<>
Apologies if you've seen this.
I saw a 5100 Jab engine at the UK agents and it had two bolt holes
damaged and the other 4 were fine. The hub has yet to be found.
I've refitted mine with the right Loctite, the JCB heavy duty stuff I'd
used was still very tight to crack off.
Don't you just love wire locking, especially twice.
Regards, Clive
________________________________
See what people are saying about Windows Live. Check out featured posts.
Check It Out!
<http://www.windowslive.com/connect?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_connect2_082008>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
Thanks Brian. The only gap seal tape that I am talking about right now is
what I would use on the wing root. I can wait till later for the flap and
aileron gap seals as you have recommended. I just am not sure where
everyone buys the clear stuff. We bought some from Spruce a while back, but
it does not go on very clear.
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Whittingham
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 6:29 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing
Jim,
Buz can answer that, but it brings up a good point, that I've had an
article sitting, waiting to be finished on my results of that study. We
learned a few things during that experiment and it did make some good
difference. I don't personally know you, but I feel like I know the kind of
person that you are. (and appreciate it) I don't think that I have to say,
but wait until you get your 40 hours and everything ironed before adding
this would be my professional opinion. Brian W.
_____
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:44:19 -0400
From: pequeajim(at)gmail.com
Subject: Lightning-List: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing
Where do you all get the clear tape that can be used to seal the wing root
gaps?
Jim!
st" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
ttp://forums.matronics.com
=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
_____
Get ideas on sharing photos from people like you. Find new ways to share.
Get Ideas Here!
<http://www.windowslive.com/explore/photogallery/posts?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Pho
to_Gallery_082008>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
Jim=2C
Yeah=2C I am familiar with the mylar tape that was white that they used
to use at SYI. I'm not sure about clear. It made a pretty big difference
in some of the Esquals b/c that was a big enough gap to let the airflow hit
the main wing spar and you could feel the difference in the feel on the st
ick. All is good with the Lightning and the newer Lightnings are even bett
er I've heard. I think that you can probably google clear mylar tape and c
ome up with something. This is in an area that if it were to fall off you
shouldn't have to worry. I'd still replace every couple of years so that i
t looks fresh and doesn't become brittle. Brian W.
From: pequeajim(at)gmail.comTo: lightning-list(at)matronics.comSubject: RE: Light
ning-List: Gap seal tap for Lightning wingDate: Mon=2C 18 Aug 2008 19:24:35
Thanks Brian. The only gap seal tape that I am talking about right now is
what I would use on the wing root. I can wait till later for the flap and
aileron gap seals as you have recommended. I just am not sure where everyo
ne buys the clear stuff. We bought some from Spruce a while back=2C but it
does not go on very clear.
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-lis
t-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian WhittinghamSent: Monday=2C Augus
t 18=2C 2008 6:29 PMTo: lightning-list(at)matronics.comSubject: RE: Lightning-
List: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing
Jim=2C Buz can answer that=2C but it brings up a good point=2C that I've h
ad an article sitting=2C waiting to be finished on my results of that study
. We learned a few things during that experiment and it did make some good
difference. I don't personally know you=2C but I feel like I know the kin
d of person that you are. (and appreciate it) I don't think that I have to
say=2C but wait until you get your 40 hours and everything ironed before a
dding this would be my professional opinion. Brian W.
Date: Mon=2C 18 Aug 2008 16:44:19 -0400From: pequeajim(at)gmail.comTo: lightni
ng-list(at)matronics.comSubject: Lightning-List: Gap seal tap for Lightning wi
ng
Where do you all get the clear tape that can be used to seal the wing root
gaps?
Jim! st" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
ttp://forums.matronics.com=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Get ideas on sharing photos from people like you. Find new ways to share. G
et Ideas Here! http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-Listhttp://fo
rums.matronics.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution
_________________________________________________________________
Get ideas on sharing photos from people like you. Find new ways to share.
http://www.windowslive.com/explore/photogallery/posts?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_P
hoto_Gallery_082008
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | EAFerguson(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
In a message dated 8/18/2008 4:53:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pequeaj
im(at)gmail.com writes:
Where do you all get the clear tape that can be used to seal the wing root
gaps?
Jim,
Buz donated the material which I and others have used. Nick has the supply
at Shelbyville.
I did quite a bit of testing with this material. It does give you a slight
increase in speed, 1 to 2 K on my LSA version, probably more on a Lightning
with gear fairings.
However, that material we were using didn't work well. If you lower the
flaps, it gets sucked up into the gap and stays there. I also had some vibration
problems, so I took it all off for the cross continental trip.
Bottom line, we need to work on the material selection.
Earl Ferguson
**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
Jim,
I actually am currently using a white tape on the wing root that is a
very close color match. I have a roll that I bought from a sail plane supply
place on the inter net, but have found similar 3M tape at the home supply
stores. Those stores also have a white electrician's tape that is easy to use.
The wide clear tape that I used to use (it does not seem to go around
corners as well as the white stuff) was found at a school supply store and is
used for binding books.
As to the very wide (about 4.5 inches) Mylar that Brain and Earl
mentioned for the flap and aileron gap seals, that was also found on the net,
but
was too thin (.01) for the intended use. The best solution for the flap gaps
is the one that Pete Disher has come up with. See one of the past
newsletters for photos. He will be flying soon and I feel certain he will share
his
performance data with our group when he finishes his 40 hour test phase. (By
the way, Australia, what are the test requirements "down under"?
buz
**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | drag reduction article |
Brain,
Remember, when you do get a chance to finish the drag reduction article
with your flight test results, I would like to put it in the newsletter.
Should be good reading for all of us.
Buz
**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
Thanks Buz:
Since my wing roots are orange, and I can not find the right color orange to
match, I need to go with clear. I did find some at Cumulus Soaring, but the
gap on my right wing root is a bit too wide and the air pressure causes the
mylar to sink in to the root. I did get 1" and 1.5", so I am thinking of
laying down the first strip of the wider tape followed by the 1" tape. This
will make it thicker and perhaps keep it from sinking in to the gap.
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 10:46 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing
Jim,
I actually am currently using a white tape on the wing root that is a
very close color match. I have a roll that I bought from a sail plane
supply place on the inter net, but have found similar 3M tape at the home
supply stores. Those stores also have a white electrician's tape that is
easy to use.
The wide clear tape that I used to use (it does not seem to go around
corners as well as the white stuff) was found at a school supply store and
is used for binding books.
As to the very wide (about 4.5 inches) Mylar that Brain and Earl
mentioned for the flap and aileron gap seals, that was also found on the
net, but was too thin (.01) for the intended use. The best solution for the
flap gaps is the one that Pete Disher has come up with. See one of the past
newsletters for photos. He will be flying soon and I feel certain he will
share his performance data with our group when he finishes his 40 hour test
phase. (By the way, Australia, what are the test requirements "down under"?
buz
_____
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal
<http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047> here.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
In a message dated 8/18/2008 11:06:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
pequeajim(at)gmail.com writes:
my wing roots are orange
**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
In a message dated 8/18/2008 11:06:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
pequeajim(at)gmail.com writes:
my wing roots are orange
Bummer. At least your hair roots are not orange. On the other hand, at
least you have some hair roots. :-)
Buz
**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
"Bummer. At least your hair roots are not orange"
They used to be.. Or at least reddish blonde.
Hey, I'm just glad to HAVE hair!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
In a message dated 8/18/2008 11:33:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
pequeajim(at)gmail.com writes:
Hey, I=99m just glad to HAVE hair!
Yea, I know, rub it in. I had all mine removed as a drag reduction
procedure.
Buz
**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your trave
l
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sales Email Account <sales(at)billandruth.net> |
Hi All,
I have been struggling with getting the canopy skins trimmed where the
acrylic is glued to the canopy frame. What I should have done and now
recommend to you is, after the canopy frame is trimmed and mounted
(hinged and gas struts installed) but, BEFORE you glue the canopy to the
frame, clamp each canopy skin to the canopy frame and trace its outline
both top and bottom of the frame on each canopy skin. This will give
you a good reference point for trimming the skin at the top of the
canopy flange. The bottom needs to be trimmed after the skin is glued
on to achieve that close tolerance fit we all want.
Bill Applegate, kit #49, Tucson, AZ.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter and Jan Disher" <pjdisher(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
Hi Buz,
I chose to register my aircraft with our authority CASA (your FAA),
being GA Experimental. Our flight test program looks very
comprehensive, some 51 pages, with a 40 hr.fly off. I would expect it
would be pretty much the same as yours. CASA here, with all the other
regulations, does seem to just copy yours to a "T"
The other authority here is the RAA, (Recreational Aviation Australia),
I don't know much about it, but most people seem to go this route. I
believe one does not need a medical certificate and maybe there is a
restriction on entering controlled airspace.
I'm sure Dennis could chime in here, there must be many advantages.
Pete D
VH-PDI
OZ
----- Original Message -----
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 12:45 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing
Jim,
I actually am currently using a white tape on the wing root that
is a very close color match. I have a roll that I bought from a sail
plane supply place on the inter net, but have found similar 3M tape at
the home supply stores. Those stores also have a white electrician's
tape that is easy to use.
The wide clear tape that I used to use (it does not seem to go
around corners as well as the white stuff) was found at a school supply
store and is used for binding books.
As to the very wide (about 4.5 inches) Mylar that Brain and Earl
mentioned for the flap and aileron gap seals, that was also found on the
net, but was too thin (.01) for the intended use. The best solution for
the flap gaps is the one that Pete Disher has come up with. See one of
the past newsletters for photos. He will be flying soon and I feel
certain he will share his performance data with our group when he
finishes his 40 hour test phase. (By the way, Australia, what are the
test requirements "down under"?
buz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal
here.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
8/18/2008 5:39 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
| From: | "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au> |
A bit off topic for gap seals but, in brief, a Lightning can be registered under
the national GA (VH- prefix) registration as an experimental where the builder
(or subsequent owner) is solely responsible for airworthiness and the builder
(while still the owner) can do most maintenance. These aircraft can basically
be anything that one can dream up and build, similar to the U.S. experimental
as I understand it.
The RAA registration (19- prefix) is not a national registration (is not recognised
outside the country). The intent of the RAA registration is similar to the
U.S. LSA rule, again as I understand it. There is a weight limit (544 kg for
homebuilt), two place, fixed gear, single engine, maximum stall speed but measured
with flaps etc in use, no maximum speed so no need to go through the propeller
fiddles for certification. Again, owner responsible for airworthiness
and owner builder can do most maintenance. RAA has a flyoff period but no formal
test requirements and I am not sure of the rule relating to development
of an operating handbook.
Pilot qualifications for these are administered by the RAA under delegation and
currently does not allow entry to controlled airspace but rule changes to allow
this with appropriate endorsement training are in work. Medical requirements
are basically fit to hold a drivers licence and no medical exam required.
For the Lightning it would be relatively easy to move from VH Experimental to RAA
19- registration and accept the reduced weight but not so easy to go the other
way.
Hope that helps. Cheers, Selwyn
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199469#199469
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Canopy Skins |
| From: | "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au> |
Good thought! I had vaguely thought about offsetting the frame edge onto tape
on the acrylic then trimming from that in a similar way to the way the book suggests
the cowl be trimmed but marking it up on the bare frame sounds like a good
idea.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199470#199470
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
You can use this fashion but becarful as the canopy will add some
thickness
to the skins and they may not sit correctly on the frame. We have glued
the
canopy on, than taped it up good so as not to scratch it. Than fit the
skins
off of the aircraft, put a cleco in every 2=94 or so to hold in place.
Trace
the lower skin on the frame. One done take the clecos out and put the
canopy
back on the aircraft. Trim the frame long from the tracing enough to
cover
your gap between the frame and fuse. Cleco back on and continue to block
sand the edge until the gap is what you like. To get the upper tirm
line.
Take the skins off, measure from the bottom of the frame to half way on
the
flange which the canopy was glued, measure this every 2-4=94 all the way
around and transfer to the skins to trim. This gives about =BD=94 or so
left to
feather the frame into the canopy or a nice look. Of course this is
only
one other way to do it.
nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sales
Email
Account
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 12:51 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Canopy Skins
Hi All,
I have been struggling with getting the canopy skins trimmed where the
acrylic is glued to the canopy frame. What I should have done and now
recommend to you is, after the canopy frame is trimmed and mounted
(hinged
and gas struts installed) but, BEFORE you glue the canopy to the frame,
clamp each canopy skin to the canopy frame and trace its outline both
top
and bottom of the frame on each canopy skin. This will give you a good
reference point for trimming the skin at the top of the canopy flange.
The
bottom needs to be trimmed after the skin is glued on to achieve that
close
tolerance fit we all want.
Bill Applegate, kit #49, Tucson, AZ.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pete Krotje" <pete(at)flylightning.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing |
Back in the day ... we used to use 3M book binding tape on our Titans. It
is a 2 inch wide clear tape that is thicker than the normal scotch tape..
Pete
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of selwyn
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 5:37 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Gap seal tap for Lightning wing
A bit off topic for gap seals but, in brief, a Lightning can be registered
under the national GA (VH- prefix) registration as an experimental where the
builder (or subsequent owner) is solely responsible for airworthiness and
the builder (while still the owner) can do most maintenance. These aircraft
can basically be anything that one can dream up and build, similar to the
U.S. experimental as I understand it.
The RAA registration (19- prefix) is not a national registration (is not
recognised outside the country). The intent of the RAA registration is
similar to the U.S. LSA rule, again as I understand it. There is a weight
limit (544 kg for homebuilt), two place, fixed gear, single engine, maximum
stall speed but measured with flaps etc in use, no maximum speed so no need
to go through the propeller fiddles for certification. Again, owner
responsible for airworthiness and owner builder can do most maintenance.
RAA has a flyoff period but no formal test requirements and I am not sure of
the rule relating to development of an operating handbook.
Pilot qualifications for these are administered by the RAA under delegation
and currently does not allow entry to controlled airspace but rule changes
to allow this with appropriate endorsement training are in work. Medical
requirements are basically fit to hold a drivers licence and no medical exam
required.
For the Lightning it would be relatively easy to move from VH Experimental
to RAA 19- registration and accept the reduced weight but not so easy to go
the other way.
Hope that helps. Cheers, Selwyn
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199469#199469
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steven Sundquist" <sttwig(at)wabroadband.com> |
Bummer, perfect timing. I glued my canopy to the frame Monday evening. I
have been thinking about how to mark the upper edge of the skin for trimming
but haven't come up with a good idea. I drew a reference line on the canopy
an inch and a half above the upper edge of the frame. I plan to measure
back down from the line an inch and 3/8th when the skin is temporarily
clamped in place to establish the upper trim line on the skin. Your method
would have been a whole lot easier.
Steve Sundquist
Kit #48
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sales Email
Account
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 10:51 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Canopy Skins
Hi All,
I have been struggling with getting the canopy skins trimmed where the
acrylic is glued to the canopy frame. What I should have done and now
recommend to you is, after the canopy frame is trimmed and mounted (hinged
and gas struts installed) but, BEFORE you glue the canopy to the frame,
clamp each canopy skin to the canopy frame and trace its outline both top
and bottom of the frame on each canopy skin. This will give you a good
reference point for trimming the skin at the top of the canopy flange. The
bottom needs to be trimmed after the skin is glued on to achieve that close
tolerance fit we all want.
Bill Applegate, kit #49, Tucson, AZ.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Oil Cooler Adapter plate |
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
As some of you may know I've been chasing an oil temperature problem
with my 3300. I know a few have been down this road in the past.
Attached is a number of views of the old and the new Doughnut which
shows the differences.
Regards, Clive
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "GARY PENNINGTON" <pennington(at)q.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Canopy Skins |
Good morning Bill and to all Lightning builders
I bonded my canopy bubble on yesterday afternoon. Like everyone else,
I've been wondering how to properly trim the skins. I need to think
about it for a while, but I think your proposal might work well. Too
late for me, but others may benefit.
Happy days to all.
Gary Pennington
----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Sundquist<mailto:sttwig(at)wabroadband.com>
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 9:55 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Canopy Skins
Bummer, perfect timing. I glued my canopy to the frame Monday
evening. I have been thinking about how to mark the upper edge of the
skin for trimming but haven't come up with a good idea. I drew a
reference line on the canopy an inch and a half above the upper edge of
the frame. I plan to measure back down from the line an inch and 3/8th
when the skin is temporarily clamped in place to establish the upper
trim line on the skin. Your method would have been a whole lot easier.
Steve Sundquist
Kit #48
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sales
Email Account
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 10:51 PM
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Lightning-List: Canopy Skins
Hi All,
I have been struggling with getting the canopy skins trimmed where the
acrylic is glued to the canopy frame. What I should have done and now
recommend to you is, after the canopy frame is trimmed and mounted
(hinged and gas struts installed) but, BEFORE you glue the canopy to the
frame, clamp each canopy skin to the canopy frame and trace its outline
both top and bottom of the frame on each canopy skin. This will give
you a good reference point for trimming the skin at the top of the
canopy flange. The bottom needs to be trimmed after the skin is glued
on to achieve that close tolerance fit we all want.
Bill Applegate, kit #49, Tucson, AZ.
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-Listhttp://forums.matronics.
com
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
m/Navigator?Lightning-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
on>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
Steve,
Your meathod is about the same as we do here, this allows for the thickness
of the acrylic.
nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steven
Sundquist
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 11:56 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Canopy Skins
Bummer, perfect timing. I glued my canopy to the frame Monday evening. I
have been thinking about how to mark the upper edge of the skin for trimming
but haven't come up with a good idea. I drew a reference line on the canopy
an inch and a half above the upper edge of the frame. I plan to measure
back down from the line an inch and 3/8th when the skin is temporarily
clamped in place to establish the upper trim line on the skin. Your method
would have been a whole lot easier.
Steve Sundquist
Kit #48
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sales Email
Account
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 10:51 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Canopy Skins
Hi All,
I have been struggling with getting the canopy skins trimmed where the
acrylic is glued to the canopy frame. What I should have done and now
recommend to you is, after the canopy frame is trimmed and mounted (hinged
and gas struts installed) but, BEFORE you glue the canopy to the frame,
clamp each canopy skin to the canopy frame and trace its outline both top
and bottom of the frame on each canopy skin. This will give you a good
reference point for trimming the skin at the top of the canopy flange. The
bottom needs to be trimmed after the skin is glued on to achieve that close
tolerance fit we all want.
Bill Applegate, kit #49, Tucson, AZ.
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Canopy Skins |
| From: | "jeynon" <jeynon2(at)verizon.net> |
What I did was after bonding the canopy to the inner canopy frame, I ran a piece
of narrow painters tape (easy to remove and leaves no residue) around the outside
of the canopy, matching the lower edge of the tape to the upper edge of
the inner frame, as seen through the canopy. Then after rough trimming the outer
skin I temporarily attached it to the canopy and got it fitting smoothly.
Then I applied a second piece of tape matching the upper edges of new tape with
the old, and marked the lower edge onto the skin.
This is effectively the same as marking the offset line and measuring down, but
I found it easier and more reliable.
Hey, I'm finally able to give someone else advise! I must be making progress.
John Eynon
Lightning Kit #53
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199639#199639
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Canopy Skins |
| From: | sttwig(at)wabroadband.com |
John,
I like your suggestion. It offers some preciseness that mine method does
not. In my world, preciseness is important, way more important than it
needs to be.
Thank you for your suggestion.
Steve Sundquist
Kit #48
>
> What I did was after bonding the canopy to the inner canopy frame, I ran a
> piece of narrow painters tape (easy to remove and leaves no residue)
> around the outside of the canopy, matching the lower edge of the tape to
> the upper edge of the inner frame, as seen through the canopy. Then after
> rough trimming the outer skin I temporarily attached it to the canopy and
> got it fitting smoothly. Then I applied a second piece of tape matching
> the upper edges of new tape with the old, and marked the lower edge onto
> the skin.
>
> This is effectively the same as marking the offset line and measuring
> down, but I found it easier and more reliable.
>
> Hey, I'm finally able to give someone else advise! I must be making
> progress.
>
> John Eynon
> Lightning Kit #53
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199639#199639
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net> |
| Subject: | Another bird in the air. |
Lynn Nelsen's Lightning has flown for the first time this morning. About a
half hour flight went well with no problems and a few typical tweeks to
make. This is the second customer aircraft fitted with the optional wing tip
extensions and performance is outstanding. Look for more info soon, and a
flight report as soon as Lynn takes over flight testing.
Nick
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Just need to sit in one near Dallas |
| From: | "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com> |
I'm new to the list, but have been following the Lightning for almost a year now.
My wife and I have agreed on my building a Lightning, and she's ready for
me to just go ahead and do it. I really need two things before I write that first
check:
1) I need to get out to Shelbyville and see the operation and get a demo ride.
2) I need to get my wife to just sit in the plane and make sure she'd be okay
on long trips.
I'll take care of #1 as soon as my Grumman is out of the shop from its annual and
I can fly out to Shelbyville. My wife insists #2 isn't required, but I know
better. I don't expect an issue, since she's a slender little yoga teacher,
but we've put over 500 hours on the Grumman and I need to make sure that she's
every bit as willing in the smaller Lightning.
So, is there anyone within a few hundred miles of Dallas that would be willing
to let my wife sit down in the right seat and try it on for size? If so, that
would save me the scheduling issue of getting us both out to Shelbyville, and
I can move a little sooner on joining the club.
In the meantime, can anyone compare it to the Grumman AA5 series as far as comfort,
shoulder room, and noise levels?
Kind regards,
Bill Strahan
pending me getting a demo ride...and her sitting in the plane and ma
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199705#199705
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com |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________________________________________________________________________________
Excellent!!! Congratulations...am I next am=C2-I next am=C2-I next????
=C2- :-)
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com
Sent: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 7:26 pm
Subject: Lightning-List: N13LN Flies
Hey Lightning list, N13LN finally got airborne. It looks like everything is
in the ballpark for the light sport category=C2-I built her for.
>>Lynn,
=C2-
Back in the hanger after first flight this morning. A 20 minute flight went
well with no problems. Will full fuel and me she has a slight left roll , ho
wever after landing noticed that the right flap is down a =C2=BC=9D, w
e will bring it up and that should straighten that out. I am going to change
the jets as we always do so did not run real fast today but @ 2650rpm and 3
500 feet I was getting 115knts TAS.=C2- May fly this afternoon some more.
=C2-
Nick
=C2-
Flew again this afternoon. Raised the flap even with the root and no roll, h
ands off now. Changed the Jets and the EGTs seem about right now
=C2-
Nick
=C2->>
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.
-= - The Lightning-List Email Forum -
-= Use the Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
-= the many List utilities such as List Un/Subscription,
-= Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse,
Chat, FAQ,
-= Photoshare, and much much more:
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
-========================
-= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
-= Same great content also available via the Web Forums!
-= --> http://forums.matronics.com
-========================
-= - List Contribution Web Site -
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-========================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
Great news Lynn..
Let=99s celebrate!!
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 7:27 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: N13LN Flies
Hey Lightning list, N13LN finally got airborne. It looks like everything
is in the ballpark for the light sport categoryI built her for.
>>Lynn,
Back in the hanger after first flight this morning. A 20 minute flight
went well with no problems. Will full fuel and me she has a slight left
roll , however after landing noticed that the right flap is down a
=C2=BC=9D, we will bring it up and that should straighten that
out. I am going to change the jets as we always do so did not run real
fast today but @ 2650rpm and 3500 feet I was getting 115knts TAS. May
fly this afternoon some more.
Nick
Flew again this afternoon. Raised the flap even with the root and no
roll, hands off now. Changed the Jets and the EGTs seem about right
now
Nick
>>
_____
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal
<http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047>
here.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Wayne Lenox" <waynelenox(at)juno.com> |
Congratulation Lynn
You will have it home soon.
Wayne
-- IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com wrote:
Hey Lightning list, N13LN finally got airborne. It looks like ev
erything is in the ballpark for the light sport category I built her for
.
>>Lynn,
Back in the hanger after first flight this morning. A 20 minute flight w
ent well with no problems. Will full fuel and me she has a slight left r
oll , however after landing noticed that the right flap is down a =C2=BC
=9D, we will bring it up and that should straighten that out. I am
going to change the jets as we always do so did not run real fast today
but @ 2650rpm and 3500 feet I was getting 115knts TAS. May fly this af
ternoon some more.
Nick
Flew again this afternoon. Raised the flap even with the root and no rol
l, hands off now. Changed the Jets and the EGTs seem about right now
Nick
>>
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal her
========================
-========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
======
____________________________________________________________
Click here to find single Christians that want to meet you today.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3ngh5yfi6lMa1WxVnr0mfn
0IyxaHhc7dkDr6I7nG0zwvolBB/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <ritchie(at)wave.co.nz> |
Good on you Lyn! I am sure you are very pleased with yourself and looking
forward to flying those hours off. I keep thinking that ZK-TDT will be the
next lightning to strike but the weekend weather Gods continue to persecute
me.
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 00:52:42 GMT, "Wayne Lenox"
wrote:
> Congratulation Lynn
> You will have it home soon.
> Wayne
>
> -- IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> />Hey Lightning list, N13LN finally got airborne. It looks like
everything
> is in the ballpark for the light sport category I built her for.
> "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />>>Lynn,
>
> Back in the hanger after first flight this morning. A 20 minute flight
> went well with no problems. Will full fuel and me she has a slight left
> roll , however after landing noticed that the right flap is down a
> , we will bring it up and that should straighten that out. I am
> going to change the jets as we always do so did not run real fast today
but
> @ 2650rpm and 3500 feet I was getting 115knts TAS. May fly this
afternoon
> some more.
>
> Nick
>
> Flew again this afternoon. Raised the flap even with the root and no
roll,
> hands off now. Changed the Jets and the EGTs seem about right now
>
> Nick
> >>
>
>
>
> It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal
>
her========================-======================================================================================================================================================
> ____________________________________________________________
> Click here to find single Christians that want to meet you today.
>
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3ngh5yfi6lMa1WxVnr0mfn0IyxaHhc7dkDr6I7nG0zwvolBB/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: Just need to sit in one near Dallas |
Bill,
Welcome to the Lightning list. I think you will love the Lightning and
enjoy the build process. My suggestion is that you combine the two things
that you "need to do" before witting the check. Your best plan would be to
attend the 2nd Annual Lightning Fly-In on 27 September. That way you could look
over the facilities, meet the Lightning team, learn about the build process,
get a demo flight for you and probably your "bride" as well, and of course
enjoy meeting other owners, builders, and Lightning enthusiast. What a great
deal.
Probably the closest flying Lightning to Dallas would be in Arizona, and
then the next closest is probably Shelbyville, Tennessee.
I have flown several Grumman Aircraft (Travelers, Cheetahs, and Tigers),
but it has been quite a while ago, so my memory is a little fuzzy. But I
think you will find the seating about as roomy but of course the Lightning
seating position is more reclined and therefore more comfortable on long flights.
Noise level really depends on your headset, but would probably be a little
less in the Lightning as the engine is not at loud. Wind noise increases
with speed and will depend on how well you get your canopy to seal with rubber
insulation.
Hope to see you at SYI on 27 September.
Blue Skies,
Buz Rich
**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net> |
This must be a contest picture at the bottom of the page. It shows a
turnbuckle just below or next to a tub connection or something. Any
guesses on where in the Lightning its found? Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
That looks like the turnbuckel for the ruddercables, and the cylinder on top
of it is probably the bungie trim motor.
On 8/21/08, Tex Mantell wrote:
>
> This must be a contest picture at the bottom of the page. It shows a
> turnbuckle just below or next to a tub connection or something. Any guesses
> on where in the Lightning its found? Tex
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | rudder cable attachments |
Has anyone tried a different means of attaching the rudder cables to the
rudder? tex
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce & Colleen Keen" <landonp(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Re: rudder cable attachments |
Hi Tex
I modified the bracket to give a straight cable line at all positions.
The original bracket tended to kink cable to cable end fitting.
Attached a picture (gives idea but not a great picture)
Regards
Bruce Keen #31.
----- Original Message -----
From: Tex Mantell
To: lightning List
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 10:36 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: rudder cable attachments
Has anyone tried a different means of attaching the rudder cables to
the rudder? tex
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: rudder cable attachments |
In a message dated 8/21/2008 8:37:27 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net writes:
Has anyone tried a different means of attaching the rudder cables to the
rudder? tex
This is kind of a scary question, Tex.
I think most of us just hooked em up. Most of the fuss was in getting the
rudder on straight. The cables seemed kind of simple.
Doug
**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | rudder cable attachments |
Tex:
You probably will need a shorter turnbuckle on one side, (I think it is the
right), to get things properly lines up, (pedals to rudder).
They may already shipped a long and short with your kit. If you get to the
point with your rudder cables, and your are out of alignment, then this is
what you will need to do.
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Kayberg(at)aol.com
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 7:12 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: rudder cable attachments
In a message dated 8/21/2008 8:37:27 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net writes:
Has anyone tried a different means of attaching the rudder cables to the
rudder? tex
This is kind of a scary question, Tex.
I think most of us just hooked em up. Most of the fuss was in getting the
rudder on straight. The cables seemed kind of simple.
Doug
_____
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal
<http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047> here.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: rudder cable attachments |
| From: | "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au> |
[quote="landonp(at)bigpond.com"]Hi Tex
I modified the bracket to give a straight cable line at all positions. The original
bracket tended to kink cable to cable end fitting.
Attached a picture (gives idea but not a great picture)
Regards
Bruce Keen #31.
> ---
Speaking as one whose rudder cables are lying loose in the fuselage through lack
of rudder at one end and pedals at the other this is all more than a little
interesting.
First off, a question for Tex. What lead you to make the enquiry in the first
place? Was it problems with getting straight leads on the cables?
Secondly to Bruce. Did you build the original system and find it did not give
a straight lead? If that's the case then it is a change that needs to be made.
If the system is tending to change the direction of the cable as it exits the
rolled swage then the cable is going to break.
Thirdly to Jim. Now, it's late here and my brain has had a hard day but I can't
see what the length of the turnbuckles has to do with the lead of the cables
from the rudder. Can you elaborate?
--------
Cheers, Selwyn
Kit 66
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199893#199893
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net> |
| Subject: | rudder cable attachments |
I have followed the directions in the manual and I find that cable can
not rotate freely in all directions as the rudder goes side to side. The
bracket also will bind and touch the fin depending how it rotates. The
cable end being solid for the first few inches , it can rub on side of
the bulkhead wall . Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: rudder cable attachments |
| From: | "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au> |
Hi Tex,
Can all this happen with the cables properly tensioned?
--------
Cheers, Selwyn
Kit 66
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199900#199900
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Sales Email Account <sales(at)billandruth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: rudder cable attachments |
Hi All,
I also was concerned about this due to bending and potential fatigue
failure at the cable end associated with the attachment to the rudder.
I did a lot of tweaking to ensure that the cables did not contact the
aft bulkhead or any other structure. Since these holes where not
installed at the factory I had to locate them myself and then cut them.
At the time, I did not comprehend the nature of the rudder stops as
well. I assumed that they would be like the ailerons and elevator,
metal to metal stops that were built into the flight controls.
I finally resolved my concern over these "issues" by reviewing how much
actual rudder movement would be encountered when taxiing and flying the
aircraft. Since there is no direct nose wheel connection to the rudders
and steering is done primarily by braking via free swivel of the nose
wheel and rudder movement will rarely if ever be much greater than a few
degrees in flight I decided that my concern was "much to do over
nothing." It would be nice to clean this area up some but, I could not
justify the effort involved to do so.
I hope this helps...............Bill with kit #49 in Tucson.
selwyn wrote:
>
>Hi Tex,
>Can all this happen with the cables properly tensioned?
>
>--------
>Cheers, Selwyn
>Kit 66
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199900#199900
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: rudder cable attachments |
| From: | "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com> |
There are a few things about the rudder set up that I think are
'opportunities for improvement' in the Esqual.
I had a 'reasonable' rudder travel based on what was available after
generally dressing up the rudder and the fin/tail and fitting the thing.
After I'd been taxiing a few times and thinking about recovering from
extremes I maximised the travel within the bounds of the structure and
got quite a lot more travel. My main concern was to be able to steer the
plane more effectively using the rudder. The brakes are all well and
good when they work but how about the day one has failed?, or landing on
wet grass?. Crosswind landing with engine out when you can give a burst
of power (I do good nightmares too).
As Bill says unlikely to need much when flying and on a 'normal day' but
why not have what's available?
What the extra travel did do was create more bending stress on the
rudder cable ends as has been mentioned and I've resolved to disconnect
them and loosen of the cable ends in the fixings so they can swing more
effectively and not stress the cable where it goes into the thimble.
That is to slim down the centring rubbers so they don't hold the cable
ends so tight. I don't know if the Lightning is similar but the cable
fixing on the rudder looks alike in the recent picture.
The other thing is the lack of travel stops, the paint will damage in
time where they bump together. I haven't figured that one out yet.
I'd be interested in what 'those that know' think about the travel
issue.
Regards, Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Sales
Email Account
Sent: 22 August 2008 17:06
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Re: rudder cable attachments
Hi All,
I also was concerned about this due to bending and potential fatigue
failure at the cable end associated with the attachment to the rudder.
I did a lot of tweaking to ensure that the cables did not contact the
aft bulkhead or any other structure. Since these holes where not
installed at the factory I had to locate them myself and then cut them.
At the time, I did not comprehend the nature of the rudder stops as
well. I assumed that they would be like the ailerons and elevator,
metal to metal stops that were built into the flight controls.
I finally resolved my concern over these "issues" by reviewing how much
actual rudder movement would be encountered when taxiing and flying the
aircraft. Since there is no direct nose wheel connection to the rudders
and steering is done primarily by braking via free swivel of the nose
wheel and rudder movement will rarely if ever be much greater than a few
degrees in flight I decided that my concern was "much to do over
nothing." It would be nice to clean this area up some but, I could not
justify the effort involved to do so.
I hope this helps...............Bill with kit #49 in Tucson.
selwyn wrote:
Hi Tex,
Can all this happen with the cables properly tensioned?
--------
Cheers, Selwyn
Kit 66
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199900#199900
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I flew, I flew!!! |
Just a short note to let you all know that I flew my Lightning today.
Flies great!
On 8/22/08, Jim Langley wrote:
> Tex:
>
>
> You probably will need a shorter turnbuckle on one side, (I think it is the
> right), to get things properly lines up, (pedals to rudder).
>
>
> They may already shipped a long and short with your kit. If you get to the
> point with your rudder cables, and your are out of alignment, then this is
> what you will need to do.
>
>
> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Kayberg(at)aol.com
> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 7:12 AM
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Lightning-List: rudder cable attachments
>
>
> In a message dated 8/21/2008 8:37:27 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net writes:
>
> Has anyone tried a different means of attaching the rudder cables to the
> rudder? tex
>
>
> This is kind of a scary question, Tex.
>
>
> I think most of us just hooked em up. Most of the fuss was in getting the
> rudder on straight. The cables seemed kind of simple.
>
>
> Doug
>
>
> _____
>
> It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal
> <http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047> here.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "JOSEPH MATHIAS LINDA MATHIAS" <lbmathias(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: I flew, I flew!!! |
Jim,
Congratulations! What a thrill!
Linda
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2008 2:57 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: I flew, I flew!!!
>
> Just a short note to let you all know that I flew my Lightning today.
>
> Flies great!
>
> On 8/22/08, Jim Langley wrote:
>> Tex:
>>
>>
>>
>> You probably will need a shorter turnbuckle on one side, (I think it is
>> the
>> right), to get things properly lines up, (pedals to rudder).
>>
>>
>>
>> They may already shipped a long and short with your kit. If you get to
>> the
>> point with your rudder cables, and your are out of alignment, then this
>> is
>> what you will need to do.
>>
>>
>>
>> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>> Kayberg(at)aol.com
>> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 7:12 AM
>> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>> Subject: Re: Lightning-List: rudder cable attachments
>>
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 8/21/2008 8:37:27 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net writes:
>>
>> Has anyone tried a different means of attaching the rudder cables to the
>> rudder? tex
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> This is kind of a scary question, Tex.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think most of us just hooked em up. Most of the fuss was in getting
>> the
>> rudder on straight. The cables seemed kind of simple.
>>
>>
>>
>> Doug
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _____
>>
>> It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal
>> <http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047> here.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> 1:16 PM
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | IFLYSMODEL(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: I flew, I flew!!! |
Congrats, Jim: Nick says he has flown N13LN about 2 hours. I wish I could do
it, but I just can not find the time to get back up to Shelbyville.
Lynn
**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Langley" <pequeajim(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: I flew, I flew!!! |
Thanks Linda:
I always appreciate your encouragement...
On 8/23/08, IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Congrats, Jim: Nick says he has flown N13LN about 2 hours. I wish I could
> do it, but I just can not find the time to get back up to Shelbyville.
> Lynn
>
>
> ------------------------------
> It's only a deal if it's where *you* want to go. Find your travel deal *
> here* <http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047>.
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | luigit(at)freemail.it |
| Subject: | Re: I flew, I flew!!! |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Colleen Keen" <landonp(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Re: rudder cable attachments |
Hi Selwyn
I first built based on original system, but was not happy as what ever
position I set the bracket I could not prevent kink at end fitting.
Your statement has merit.
Regards
Bruce #31
----- Original Message -----
From: "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au>
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 10:28 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: rudder cable attachments
>
> [quote="landonp(at)bigpond.com"]Hi Tex
>
> I modified the bracket to give a straight cable line at all positions.
> The original bracket tended to kink cable to cable end fitting.
> Attached a picture (gives idea but not a great picture)
>
> Regards
>
> Bruce Keen #31.
>
>> ---
>
>
> Speaking as one whose rudder cables are lying loose in the fuselage
> through lack of rudder at one end and pedals at the other this is all more
> than a little interesting.
>
> First off, a question for Tex. What lead you to make the enquiry in the
> first place? Was it problems with getting straight leads on the cables?
>
> Secondly to Bruce. Did you build the original system and find it did not
> give a straight lead? If that's the case then it is a change that needs
> to be made. If the system is tending to change the direction of the cable
> as it exits the rolled swage then the cable is going to break.
>
> Thirdly to Jim. Now, it's late here and my brain has had a hard day but I
> can't see what the length of the turnbuckles has to do with the lead of
> the cables from the rudder. Can you elaborate?
>
> --------
> Cheers, Selwyn
> Kit 66
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=199893#199893
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM |
| Subject: | Re: rudder cable attachments |
Here are a few more thoughts on the rudder cable discussion:
-Modifying the cable to rudder attach points so that there is no "kinking"
is a good idea, but the real important thing is to be sure the glass "pass
through" holes are placed and shaped so that there is no chance for interference
with the cable. I have seen some situations where the cable was able to
catch on the edges of the glass and bind the rudder travel. Not good.
-It is important to be sure you can get complete rudder travel as designed,
but I see no need to modify so that you can get even more. So far I have not
run out of rudder travel when landing in all kinds of cross wind in
Lightnings and Esquals - well over 500 hours. Both airplanes have enough rudder
effectiveness to perform good slips as they are designed.
-From a maintenance perspective, you will probably need to re-tighten your
rudder cables after about 6 months to a year of use. They cables seem to
stretch a little and loosen up enough that you will have too much slack. I have
noticed this on most of the Lightnings that I have flown. You will notice
this need to re-tighten the cables if you are flying and can move the rudder
pedals slightly without feeling any actual rudder input. On one airplane you
could mode the rudder pedals more than an inch in either direction without
feeling any real rudder travel. And don't forget to re-safety the turn buckles
after adjusting the cable tension.
Blue Skies,
Buz
**************It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
July 25, 2008 - August 24, 2008
Lightning-Archive.digest.vol-aw