Lightning-Archive.digest.vol-bx
October 10, 2009 - December 06, 2009
Lightning-Archive.digest.vol-bx
October 10, 2009 - December 06, 2009
My first impression is no employee of a builder assist center can touch any actual
part of the airplane being assembled, just demo how to assemble it. Like
the "troll" said, $3,500 a week sounds a little steep for part-time ground school.
On the new 2009 version of Form 8130-12, right after the big open space where
FAA wants any commercial assistance confessed, they place a bold print warning
from USC 18-1001 threatening 5 years bunking with Bernie Madoff for anyone who
falsifies, conceals or covers up by any trick, scheme, device, or false entry
details of using commercial assistance. 8 years if terrorism is involved so
what IS the wing station max bomb load of the Lightning?
Less dramatic but also alarming for those who did not heed the troll's warning,
a flow chart in the new AC says that if a nonapproved kit (means not on the existing
51% list which I guess Lightning was not) was purchased prior to October
1, 2009, it is grandfathered and can be completed under the "easier" old regs
UNLESS commercial assistance was used, in which case the new regs and penalties
will apply.
Nostradamus Troll was wrong about one thing he or she objected to (still 99% right
though). Apparently paint, upholstery, and avionics can still be provided/installed
by a manufacturer without risking revocation of the aircraft's amateur
experimental certificate and thus grounding it forever (sure ain't eligible
under traditional Part 23 manufactured aircraft regs). .
I have never built a kit (after owning hulled and float amphibs, looking for a
nice LSA taildragger now and loved the lines of Lightning which may grow a little
wheel back there someday or perhaps I could modify) and most you guys know
way more about this experimental and amateur stuff than I do. But the language
in these sections of this policy sounds a lot like the kind of stuff I have
read being added over the past thirty years clearly written to establish a violation
of federal law if you screw with it.
Were these requirements already in the regs to this degree?
Section 9 -
147
b. Statement of Eligibility.
The applicant must submit a NOTARIZED Form 8130-12, Eligibility
Statement, Amateur-Built Aircraft (refer to figure 4-14), certifying the major
portion was fabricated and
assembled for educational or recreational purposes.
(1) The form specifies that an amateur builder identify if commercial assistance
was used in the
construction of the aircraft and identify the source of the assistance.
(2) Evidence and records must be available to support these statements and provided
to the FAA upon request.
(3) Records that are typically requested are listed in paragraph 151e.
c. Additional Information and Demonstrating Level of Knowledge.
To determine level of
knowledge, the FAA may ask the applicant to provide information during the airworthiness
inspection.
For example, the FAA could ask the applicant to describe a particular construction
task or technique
used to fabricate the aircraft or provide information as to the type of materials.
These discussions enable
the FAA to evaluate the involvement of the applicant in the construction of the
aircraft.
148
b. Providing Commercial and/or Educational Assistance. Amateur builders may contract
for
commercial assistance, but should notify the FAA if they intend to use commercial
assistance.
Amateur builders may also receive commercial educational assistance in the fabrication
or assembly of
specific parts, and the completion of tasks or processes involved in the construction
of an aircraft. In
some cases, this commercial assistance may be provided by kit manufacturers. The
FAA may credit
commercial assistance provided for educational purposes toward the major portion
determination.
However, this educational assistance cannot exceed a demonstration on how to perform
the task.
(1) -
(2) -
(3) The FAA may request to observe fabrication and assembly activities at any
commercial
assistance facility to determine whether the project can meet the major portion
requirement of
21.191(g).
--------------------
This last part sounds a lot like unannounced and perhaps even incognito inspections
are coming.
Well, anyway, at least Arion has new guidance to professionally (unlike me) evaluate
now and either get cracking on the checklists and certs for that long-awaited
Lightning 51% kit approval or just focus on your S/ELSA which I will likely
buy into sometime in 2011.
Keep up the good work... but watch your P's and Q's.
--------
Flight IS Freedom
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=267189#267189
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: N251TM
Date: Oct 10, 2009
Its all done and flying great. Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: N251TM
Date: Oct 10, 2009
Tex,
Very nice Looks familiar seems to me you have got a few others painted the
same!
We just printed a picture and taped it to the over head at the forums today.
WX is not good but have 9 Lightnings here and lots of walk-ins.
See you next year..
PS flew the great Planes Eagle 580 last night on the ramp. you will have to
bring some to fly next year.
nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tex Mantell
Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 10:53 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: N251TM
Its all done and flying great. Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
From: IFLYSMODEL(at)AOL.COM
Date: Oct 10, 2009
Subject: Re: N251TM
Beautiful job Tex. Enjoy!
Lynn Nelsen
In a message dated 10/10/2009 11:58:15 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net writes:
Its all done and flying great. Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: N251TM
From: "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au>
Date: Oct 11, 2009
Hi Tex.
That is a work of art, congratulations.
I notice your retractable sunshade, is that completely home grown or an adaption
of something commercial? I prefer that idea to the painted out canopy and I've
seen similar things in some commercial builds but I haven't found a source
yet.
I'm just beginning paint, otherwise most else is done.
--------
Cheers, Selwyn
Kit 66
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=267438#267438
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: N251TM
Date: Oct 11, 2009
The shade is from an RV. look on their web site. Tex
----- Original Message -----
From: "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au>
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 3:11 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: N251TM
>
> Hi Tex.
>
> That is a work of art, congratulations.
> I notice your retractable sunshade, is that completely home grown or an
> adaption of something commercial? I prefer that idea to the painted out
> canopy and I've seen similar things in some commercial builds but I
> haven't found a source yet.
>
> I'm just beginning paint, otherwise most else is done.
>
> --------
> Cheers, Selwyn
> Kit 66
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=267438#267438
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "JOSEPH MATHIAS LINDA MATHIAS" <lbmathias(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: N251TM
Date: Oct 11, 2009
Tex,
It looks very nice; congratulations on a great job! We missed you
in SYI; maybe next year!
Linda
----- Original Message -----
From: Tex Mantell
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 11:52 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: N251TM
Its all done and flying great. Tex
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
10/11/09 18:34:00
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: N251TM
From: "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au>
Date: Oct 11, 2009
wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net wrote:
> The shade is from an RV. look on their web site. Tex
>
> ---
Thanks Tex. Just goes to show Google doesn't always get it right! "Sunshade"
and variants did not turn up anything useful but, sure enough, its on the Vans
RV accessories list. "Koger sunshade" finds it in other places as well.
--------
Cheers, Selwyn
Kit 66
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=267525#267525
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Oct 11, 2009
Subject: MAYDAY - MAYDAY - MAYDAY
OR HELP - HELP - HELP. I must have taken over 100 photos at the Lightning
Homecoming and fly-in to be used in the Lightning newsletter. You can
imagine my horror when I tried to down load them from the camera just now and
found that only 17 photos had worked. Hey, I don't mind buying a new
camera, but the photos I took are lost forever. Bummer. So PLEASE help me out.
If you took any photos while in SYI this past weekend, please send them
to me so the next newsletter will at least have some record of our great
fly-in. I also took photos to be used for the "Lightning of the Month"
feature in the newsletter and now I have none for that either. So send all that
you have - PLEASE.
Now just a few words about the fly-in. Those that were there will tell
you what a super time we had even though the weather was delta sierra. We
didn't get to do any of the flying events that were planned because of rain
and low ceilings, but everything else was outstanding. Nick, Mark, Pete,
and all the SYI gang put on a first class event and it was great to see all
the Lightning team and customers again. It was great to see a hangar full
of Lightnings and even several over in the Jabiru hangar. Start planning
now for next year.
Blue Skies,
Buz
PS: SEND ME SOME PHTOTS!!!!!!!!!!!!
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: N251TM
Date: Oct 12, 2009
From: "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Very pretty aircraft, is it a Latte?
I'm just mounting my Lightning Spats on the main gear of my Esqual,
what's the recommended height of the bottom of the spat and the ground?
(ground clearance....)
Ta, Clive
Red and white Esqual (strawberry split?)
________________________________
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tex
Mantell
Sent: 10 October 2009 16:53
Subject: Lightning-List: N251TM
Its all done and flying great. Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: N251TM
Date: Oct 12, 2009
I have been told that the less the tire shows the less drag. But I let
the air out of the tire and see how low it goes so when you get a flat
the pant dont touch the ground. Tex
----- Original Message -----
From: James, Clive R
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 2:53 AM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: N251TM
Very pretty aircraft, is it a Latte?
I'm just mounting my Lightning Spats on the main gear of my Esqual,
what's the recommended height of the bottom of the spat and the ground?
(ground clearance....)
Ta, Clive
Red and white Esqual (strawberry split?)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tex
Mantell
Sent: 10 October 2009 16:53
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Lightning-List: N251TM
Its all done and flying great. Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Oct 12, 2009
Subject: Flash News from the Fly-In
All,
I forgot to mention in my last email request for assistance for photos
taken at the recently completed Lightning Homecoming and Fly-In that we
also had a very unexpected arrival at the event. We actually had a Mustang
show up to visit the Arion facilities. Although his arrival was very low
and slow (perhaps because of the weather). So you can look forward to
photos of the Mustang in the next newsletter. My plan will be to have the next
issue published no later than 1 November - just over 2 &1/2 weeks away.
But if you were there, please send your photos directly to me. Dana has
already forwarded Carl and Pats photos of the event and I will use many of
those in the newsletter. By the way, Dana is almost as fast on a "creeper" as
she is in her Mini Cooper. I will have all the creeper race results in
the newsletter as well. It should be a fun issue.
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: N251TM
Date: Oct 12, 2009
From: "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Great idea, I'll do that, thanks, Regards, Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tex
Mantell
Sent: 12 October 2009 11:46
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: N251TM
I have been told that the less the tire shows the less drag. But I let
the air out of the tire and see how low it goes so when you get a flat
the pant dont touch the ground. Tex
----- Original Message -----
From: James, Clive R <mailto:clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 2:53 AM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: N251TM
Very pretty aircraft, is it a Latte?
I'm just mounting my Lightning Spats on the main gear of my
Esqual, what's the recommended height of the bottom of the spat and the
ground? (ground clearance....)
Ta, Clive
Red and white Esqual (strawberry split?)
________________________________
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tex
Mantell
Sent: 10 October 2009 16:53
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Lightning-List: N251TM
Its all done and flying great. Tex
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Lightning and the 51% rule
Date: Oct 13, 2009
As you all may know the FAA recently published the new AC for EAB. AC-20-27G
now includes item like the definition of Fabrication,
An addition about commercial assistance, and a new Fabrication and Assembly
checklist. The check list is appendix 8 to the document.
Many have asked about if the Lightning kit in its current form would comply
to the new check list. Arion Aircraft has spent the better part of the day
going thru this list.
We have followed the AC's guidance as best as we could interpret it and have
come up with some good numbers.
The new list gives 4 categories in which 1 total point can be awarded for an
individual task.
You can add or delete tasks as required based on the aircraft design and it
application at hand.
Using the guide provided and the summary chart at the end of the appendix we
have found that;
Builder assembly counts for 30.0% of the kit.
Builder fabrication counts for 30.2% of the kit.
Kit Manufacturer ( Arion Aircraft, LLC) accounts for 39.8%.
This gives the builder 60.2% of the work required, well above the 51%
required.
This also does not take into account a builder whom; wires their own panel,
paints there own aircraft, and builds their own interior.
All items they will get more credit for. The Check list does not penalize a
builder for hiring these items out, but does credit own who is willing to
perform those tasks.
The New AC does state that a kit need not be on the approved 51% list to
receive and inspection or AWC. For aircraft not on the approved current
list, the builder should fill out the provided check list for the DAR when
time comes for the inspection.
We have started the paper work to have the Kit evaluation team come to Arion
Aircraft, LLC at there earliest convenience to inspect the Lightning kit and
have it added to the list.
I hope that any one interested in building a lightning as there next project
will remain so, and read the AC carefully. There is much speculation and
"Expert" opinions out there, but rest assured the rule has not changed for
the home builder and building a kit not on the approved list was not, and
still is not a problem.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Lightning and the 51% rule
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Oct 13, 2009
One of my favorite aspects of ALL of my dealings with Arion has been the fantastic
combination of a high degree of professionalism and a fun-hearted approach
to what they do.
I feel this is an unbeatable quality in a company, and one which I have strived
to create in any organization I have been part of.
With recent troll activity in particular it would have been quite easy to have
formulated a response that was further from these two ideals than I know Nick
and company strive for.
I've known many seasoned CEOs with multiple degrees to their name that don't handle
themselves with the same degree of professionalism that Nick exhibits on
a regular basis both in this forum and in my dealings with him directly.
If I had not already built a Lightning, this would weigh heavily in my decision
to do so. I continue to be impressed.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=267769#267769
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Re: Lightning and the 51% rule
Date: Oct 13, 2009
Thank you Bill.
Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Strahan
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 1:13 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Lightning and the 51% rule
One of my favorite aspects of ALL of my dealings with Arion has been the
fantastic combination of a high degree of professionalism and a fun-hearted
approach to what they do.
I feel this is an unbeatable quality in a company, and one which I have
strived to create in any organization I have been part of.
With recent troll activity in particular it would have been quite easy to
have formulated a response that was further from these two ideals than I
know Nick and company strive for.
I've known many seasoned CEOs with multiple degrees to their name that don't
handle themselves with the same degree of professionalism that Nick exhibits
on a regular basis both in this forum and in my dealings with him directly.
If I had not already built a Lightning, this would weigh heavily in my
decision to do so. I continue to be impressed.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=267769#267769
________________________________________________________________________________
From: EAFerguson(at)AOL.COM
Date: Oct 13, 2009
Subject: Annual Gathering of the Lightnings
I had a great time, even though the weather wasn't the best. Nice people,
good friends, neat airplanes, useful seminars, rain and cold gusty wind. It
was worth the trip. I was especially pleased to see the prospective
Lightning builders who came by. Those who didn't make it, for whatever reason,
and
weather and distance come to mind, missed a great event. Hope you can come
next year!
My thanks to Pete, Nick, et al for the hospitality, and the effort to make
this a worthwhile event. You succeeded.
Earl Ferguson, W.R.
Atlanta
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 13, 2009
From: LISA TURNER <lisaturner(at)prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: Annual Gathering of the Lightnings
Yes indeed, over the top thanks to everyone there who made us feel so welcome also
and showed us work in progress, the Jab engine, and completed Lightnings.
Sorry we could not stay longer; all I can do now is dream Lightnings and save
for the special day when I can have one!
Lisa
Lisa Turner
Hayesville, NC
Email: lisaturner(at)prodigy.net
________________________________
From: "EAFerguson(at)aol.com" <EAFerguson(at)aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 3:06:46 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Annual Gathering of the Lightnings
I had a great time, even though the weather wasn't the best. Nice people, good
friends, neat airplanes, useful seminars, rain and cold gusty wind. It was worth
the trip. I was especially pleased to see the prospective Lightning builders
who came by. Those who didn't make it, for whatever reason, and weather
and distance come to mind, missed a great event. Hope you can come next year!
My thanks to Pete, Nick, et al for the hospitality, and the effort to make this
a worthwhile event. You succeeded.
Earl Ferguson, W.R.
Atlanta
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Lightning and the 51% rule
From: marvinlnaz(at)yahoo.com
Date: Oct 13, 2009
Nick. How does the 'Factory build assist' play into this?
Marvin
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
-----Original Message-----
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:11:10
Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning and the 51% rule
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Lightning and the 51% rule
Date: Oct 13, 2009
Marvin,
I believe we will have to look at what we do with the builders assist a
little closer. We run an assist program here in TN, not a build it for
you
so we have always work along with the intent and spirit of the 51% rule.
However now we will have to look at each individual thing we may help
with
or do that may cause a problem with the new rule. It is interesting
though
when you look at how the points are spread out or awarded to with a
task. 1
point for each task. If that task already covered an Item where the MFG
was
awarded =BD a point and the builder the other half, well a build assist
would
than be looking at what part of the =BD a point the builder got would be
considered assistance. So may be if we showed them how to set up the
holes
and measure the part and than the builder drilled it and assembled the
part,
we might get 1 or 2 tenths of the builders =BD point and the builder
would get
3-4 tenths instead of the whole 5 tenths of a point. This would mean a
swing
of 0.2% for the MFG. When considering that there is roughly 10% left
that
Arion Aircraft could do to the kit and still have the kit meet the rule
than
there is a lot that a build assist center could provide and not cause an
eligibility problem for the builder. This may be different if the center
drilled and cut all the parts and all the builder did was come and bolt
something together, or the kit already was very marginal in the %
required,
but in the case of the Lightning kit it appears that when using the
system
and guidelines in the AC that this should remain a viable option for the
Lightning kit and someone looking to get a bit of help building there
plane.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
marvinlnaz(at)yahoo.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Lightning and the 51% rule
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Annual Gathering of the Lightnings
Date: Oct 13, 2009
From: n5pb(at)AOL.COM
Pete, Nick, Mark, Buz and the entire Lightning/Jabiru team at KSYI,
Thanks for another great fly-in event. I had a great time! It was great to meet
all the lightning builders/owners
and their families. The food was great, briefings well presented, ground gevents
fun, and the
formation flying superb!
I know alot of work goes into this behind the scenes and it's certainly appreciated.
Aleady looking towards next year's
event-less the rain.....
Thanks for all you do.
Bear
Bear
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brian Proett" <baproe(at)online.no>
Subject: Lightning and the 51% rule
Date: Oct 14, 2009
Good answer, also liked the interpretation on the new rulings. This
helps
allay my fears and concerns. Keep us informed as things progress.
Thanks
This might be good newsletter material.
Brian P.
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
flylightning
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 11:19 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning and the 51% rule
Marvin,
I believe we will have to look at what we do with the builders assist a
little closer. We run an assist program here in TN, not a build it for
you
so we have always work along with the intent and spirit of the 51% rule.
However now we will have to look at each individual thing we may help
with
or do that may cause a problem with the new rule. It is interesting
though
when you look at how the points are spread out or awarded to with a
task. 1
point for each task. If that task already covered an Item where the MFG
was
awarded =BD a point and the builder the other half, well a build assist
would
than be looking at what part of the =BD a point the builder got would be
considered assistance. So may be if we showed them how to set up the
holes
and measure the part and than the builder drilled it and assembled the
part,
we might get 1 or 2 tenths of the builders =BD point and the builder
would get
3-4 tenths instead of the whole 5 tenths of a point. This would mean a
swing
of 0.2% for the MFG. When considering that there is roughly 10% left
that
Arion Aircraft could do to the kit and still have the kit meet the rule
than
there is a lot that a build assist center could provide and not cause an
eligibility problem for the builder. This may be different if the center
drilled and cut all the parts and all the builder did was come and bolt
something together, or the kit already was very marginal in the %
required,
but in the case of the Lightning kit it appears that when using the
system
and guidelines in the AC that this should remain a viable option for the
Lightning kit and someone looking to get a bit of help building there
plane.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
marvinlnaz(at)yahoo.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 3:33 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Lightning and the 51% rule
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Rudder cable to Rudder attach.
Date: Oct 14, 2009
To group,
A few months back, maybe several now, there was some discussion about the
geometry of the rudder cable to the rudder attach u bracket. I know that the
group had come up with a good solution but here is another easy off the
shelf solution. Dave up in New York suggested it and this should work very
well. Replace you U bracket with a male rod-end. The hole has a 10-32 plate
in the rudder, so a standard 10-32 male rod end will work great. Use a
washer and jam nut under the rod-end. The rod end will end up putting the
pivot slightly farther forward than the u bracket. It may be necessary to
re-adjust your cables, and in extreme cases shorten the threaded portion of
the cable slightly to fit properly into the turn-buckle. If you don't have
an issue than don't worry about it, if you do this can be a very good
solution.
Nick
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 14, 2009
From: Charles Gallagher <crg326(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Lightning and the 51% rule
Bill,your comments and assessments of Nick and team are right on target. Pe
te and Nick obviously love what they are doing and it manifest itself throu
gh out the organization.The product continues to be perfected with each bui
ld which illustrates Arion's desire for continuous improvement. Who says in
novation and excellence is dead in the USA. All the best,Regards,Charles
- ---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - -- -------------
Tue, 10/13/09, Bill Strahan wrote:
From: Bill Strahan <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Lightning and the 51% rule
Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 1:13 PM
One of my favorite aspects of ALL of my dealings with Arion has been the fa
ntastic combination of a high degree of professionalism and a fun-hearted a
pproach to what they do.
I feel this is an unbeatable quality in a company, and one which I have str
ived to create in any organization I have been part of.-
With recent troll activity in particular it would have been quite easy to h
ave formulated a response that was further from these two ideals than I kno
w Nick and company strive for.
I've known many seasoned CEOs with multiple degrees to their name that don'
t handle themselves with the same degree of professionalism that Nick exhib
its on a regular basis both in this forum and in my dealings with him direc
tly.-
If I had not already built a Lightning, this would weigh heavily in my deci
sion to do so.- I continue to be impressed.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=267769#267769
le, List Admin.
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Rudder cable to Rudder attach.
From: "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au>
Date: Oct 15, 2009
Hi Nick,
That's OK as far as it goes but what do you use to get from the rod end to the
cable which has a single tang on the end? A bolt through the rod end and then
through the cable end?
--------
Cheers, Selwyn
Kit 66
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=268021#268021
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Stauffer" <mark(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Another Lightning takes flight
Date: Oct 19, 2009
To all -
Steve Hacker's Lightning flew for the first time this past Friday, 16 Oct
2009. Steve's is the 47th to fly out of 81 kits delivered. Initial reports
are the plane flew great!
Congratulations Steven!!
Mark
Mark Stauffer
Production Manager
Arion Aircraft
2842 Hwy 231 North
Shelbyville, TN 37160
(931) 680-1781
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: spark plugs
Date: Oct 19, 2009
Has anyone tried indexing sparkplugs on the Jabiru engine?
Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Oct 19, 2009
Subject: Re: spark plugs
In a message dated 10/19/2009 8:23:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net writes:
Has anyone tried indexing sparkplugs on the Jabiru engine?
Tex
Interesting thought, Tex. I have never heard of anyone indexing plugs on
airplanes. Which plug would you index? Maybe both? Many many years ago
when I was racing a Corvette I tried it a few times, but never could tell
any difference. Maybe I could have seen a difference on a dyno, but could
not see or feel a difference by driving. Besides, it was time consuming and
sometimes hard to find the right thickness of washers to get accurate
indexing. But hey, I think you should try it on your Jabiru and give us a tech
tips report on your results for the newsletter.
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Copperstate Airshow
Date: Oct 21, 2009
Group,
The Copper-state Airshow in Casa Grande Arizona Starts Thursday and runs
thru the week-end. Gregg Hobbs our West coast Dealer will be there with his
Lightning and a good display. I hear there will be several Lightning kit
parts in the booth to look at and a lot of good information to browse. Go
down and take a look, if you need a Demo ride I am sure that Greg can
schedule that too.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Flutter
Date: Oct 23, 2009
From: "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTFZNrTYp3k
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pete Krotje" <pete(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: November Lightning Newsletter Now Posted
Date: Oct 28, 2009
The November Newsletter is now posted at www.flylightning.net. Another
great effort from Buz Rich. Thanks Buz!!
Pete Krotje
Arion Aircraft, LLC
931-680-1781
www.flylightning.net
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Oct 29, 2009
Subject: Lightning Newsletter for November 2009
All,
The November Lightning Newsletter (Issue 2-11) is now posted on both
the Lightning web site and Jim Langley's site. Go to either:
_www.flylightning.net_ (http://www.flylightning.net/) .
or
_http://www.jimslightning.com/_ (http://www.jimslightning.com/)
This month's newsletter covers the recent Lightning Homecoming and Fly-In,
as well as the latest news from the factory, dealers, and builders and
flyers. In the factory section is a photo of the newest Lightning employee,
Angi Skinner. Call the factory and tell her hello. Also, you will see the
new Lightning T shirt (modeled by Dana) that you can order. They may even
have polo shirts with the new Arion Lightning logo if enough people are
interested. For either shirt, call or email Mark. Once again, Pete has an
engine clinic article (Jabiru Lubrication), and the safety article has to do
with winter flying and the cautions about icing conditions. In the Tech
Tips section, Tex shares some more tips that he has come up with (maybe I
should call it Tex Tips).
Finally, I have a request. I need some more photos for future "Lightnings
of the month" consideration. So if your jet has not been a past Lightning
of the month, send me a photo of your airplane.
Blue Skies,
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 2009
From: Marvin Williams <marvinlnaz(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Engine break-in
Pete:
Would a 3300 get the same quality break-in in a LSA Lightning as it would in a
standard Lightning? I ask because of the different prop pitch, thus different
engine loading in the two different configurations. It seems to me that the
engine loading of a LSA wouldn't be as great as with the standard Lightning.
I remember that the best way to break in the 3300 is to do several touch and
goes resulting in full power, then reduced power repeatedly.
Perhaps the lighter loading of the LSA engine could be compensated by a longer
break-in period?
Just a thought.
Regards,
Marvin
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pete Krotje" <pete(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Engine break-in
Date: Oct 29, 2009
Marvin,
The rpms and prop loading on the Lightning LS-1 more closely match the
expected RPMs of Jabiru LSA aircraft. I would expect break in to be very
similar. The Lightning EXP when propped for speed puts more load on the
engine but I don't know if that really affects break in. The only times
we've seen problems with inadequate break in is when owners try to baby
their engines and do not run full throttle to climb out and cruise at a
reduced throttle setting of 2300 rpm.
Pete Krotje
Jabiru USA Sport Aircraft, LLC
931-680-2800
www.usjabiru.com
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marvin
Williams
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:40 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Engine break-in
Pete:
Would a 3300 get the same quality break-in in a LSA Lightning as it would in
a standard Lightning? I ask because of the different prop pitch, thus
different engine loading in the two different configurations. It seems to
me that the engine loading of a LSA wouldn't be as great as with the
standard Lightning. I remember that the best way to break in the 3300 is to
do several touch and goes resulting in full power, then reduced power
repeatedly.
Perhaps the lighter loading of the LSA engine could be compensated by a
longer break-in period?
Just a thought.
Regards,
Marvin
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Engine break-in
Date: Oct 29, 2009
Marvin,
As Pete said the LS-1 would have very similar prop loading to the Jabiru J
series aircraft. I would think that if the engine is propped to run near
3300RPM at WOT than the expected prop load at 2850 say would be the same
regardless of airframe prop combo, than again I think prop load is somewhat
of a voodoo art any ways.
Nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marvin
Williams
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 9:40 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Engine break-in
Pete:
Would a 3300 get the same quality break-in in a LSA Lightning as it would in
a standard Lightning? I ask because of the different prop pitch, thus
different engine loading in the two different configurations. It seems to
me that the engine loading of a LSA wouldn't be as great as with the
standard Lightning. I remember that the best way to break in the 3300 is to
do several touch and goes resulting in full power, then reduced power
repeatedly.
Perhaps the lighter loading of the LSA engine could be compensated by a
longer break-in period?
Just a thought.
Regards,
Marvin
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 29, 2009
From: Marvin Williams <marvinlnaz(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Engine break-in
Thanks Pete and Nick,
I am of the same opinion as you Nick :-)
Marvin
________________________________
From: flylightning <info(at)flylightning.net>
Sent: Thu, October 29, 2009 8:37:53 AM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Engine break-in
Marvin,
As Pete said the LS-1 would have very similar
prop loading to the Jabiru J series aircraft. I would think that if the engine
is propped to run near 3300RPM at WOT than the expected prop load at 2850 say
would be the same regardless of airframe prop combo, than again I think prop
load is somewhat of a voodoo art any ways.
Nick
________________________________
From:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marvin Williams
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009
9:40 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Engine
break-in
Pete:
Would a 3300 get the same quality break-in in a LSA Lightning as it would in a
standard Lightning? I ask because of the different prop pitch, thus
different engine loading in the two different configurations. It
seems to me that the engine loading of a LSA wouldn't be as great as with the
standard Lightning. I remember that the best way to break in the 3300 is
to do several touch and goes resulting in full power, then reduced power
repeatedly.
Perhaps the lighter loading of the LSA engine could be compensated by a longer
break-in period?
Just a thought.
Regards,
Marvin
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Oct 30, 2009
From: LISA TURNER <lisaturner(at)prodigy.net>
Subject: Re: November Lightning Newsletter Now Posted
Pete, another great newsletter! Please thank Buz.
We're saving our pennies for a Lightning!
Sorry we could not stay for more fly-in fun.
Take care,
Lisa and Jerry
Lisa P. Turner
559 Broken Arrow Trail
Hayesville, NC 28904-9277
Mobile: 561-866-0011
Home: 828-389-2127
Email: lisaturner(at)prodigy.net
________________________________
From: Pete Krotje <pete(at)flylightning.net>
Sent: Wed, October 28, 2009 6:06:36 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: November Lightning Newsletter Now Posted
November Lightning Newsletter Now Posted
The November Newsletter is now posted atwww.flylightning.net. Another great effort from Buz Rich. Thanks Buz!!
Pete Krotje
Arion Aircraft, LLC
931-680-1781
www.flylightning.net
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 01, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: PLEASE READ - Matronics Email List Fund Raiser During
November!
Dear Listers,
Each November I hold a PBS-like fund raiser to support the continued operation and upgrade of the List services at Matronics. It's solely through the Contributions of List members that these Matronics Lists are possible. There is NO advertising to support the Lists. You might have noticed the conspicuous lack of flashing banners and annoying pop-ups on the Matronics Email List email messages and web site pages such as the Matronics List Forums ( http://forums.matronics.com ), the List Wiki ( http://wiki.matronics.com), or other related pages such as the List Search Engine ( http://www.matronics.com/search ), the List Browser ( http://www.matronics.com/listbrowse ), etc. This is because I believe in a List experience that is completely about the sport we all enjoy - namely Airplanes and not about annoying advertisements.
During the month of November I will be sending out List messages every couple of
days reminding everyone that the Fund Raiser is underway. I ask for your patience
and understanding during the Fund Raiser and throughout these regular messages.
The Fund Raiser is only financial support mechanism I have to pay all
of the bills associated with running these lists. Your personal Contribution
counts!
Once again, this year I've got a terrific line up of free gifts to go along with
the various Contribution levels. Most all of these gifts have been provided
by some of the vary members and vendors that you'll find on Matronics Lists and
have been either donated or provided at substantially discounted rates.
This year, these generous people include Bob Nuckolls of the AeroElectric Connection (http://www.aeroelectric.com/), Andy Gold of the Builder's Bookstore (http://www.buildersbooks.com/), and Jon Croke of HomebuiltHELP (http://www.homebuilthelp.com/).
These are extremely generous guys and I encourage you to visit their respective
web sites. Each one offers a unique and very useful aviation-related product
line. I would like publicly to thank Bob, Andy, and Jon for their generous support
of the Lists again this year!!
You can make your List Contribution using any one of three secure methods this
year including using a credit card, PayPal, or by personal check. All three methods
afford you the opportunity to select one of this year's free gifts with
a qualifying Contribution amount!!
To make your Contribution, please visit the secure site below:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
I would like to thank everyone in advance for their generous financial AND moral
support over the years!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Lightning on the Cover of Sport Pilot
Date: Nov 02, 2009
To Group,
The Lightning LS-1 is on the cover of the November issue of Sport Pilot mag.
Good article and some great photos.
Nick Otterback
Arion
________________________________________________________________________________
From: KENT SAHR <ksahr(at)msn.com>
Subject: Lightning on the Cover of Sport Pilot
Date: Nov 02, 2009
About time you're getting the recognition the LIGHTNING deserves.
KENT
From: info(at)flylightning.net
Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning on the Cover of Sport Pilot
Date: Mon=2C 2 Nov 2009 10:54:01 -0600
To Group=2C
The Lightning LS-1 is on the cover of the November issue of Sport Pilot mag
. Good article and some great photos.
Nick Otterback
Arion
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Date: Nov 02, 2009
Subject: Lightning on the Cover of Sport Pilot
Thank you Kent,
Finally getting them out there.
Nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of KENT SAHR
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 11:53 AM
Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] RE: Lightning-List: Lightning on the Cover of
Sport Pilot
About time you're getting the recognition the LIGHTNING deserves.
KENT
_____
From: info(at)flylightning.net
Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning on the Cover of Sport Pilot
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:54:01 -0600
To Group,
The Lightning LS-1 is on the cover of the November issue of Sport Pilot mag.
Good article and some great photos.
Nick Otterback
Arion
lectric.com
/">www.buildersbooks.com
ebuilthelp.com
ww.matronics.com/contribution
st">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
ronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Lightning on the Cover of Sport Pilot
Date: Nov 02, 2009
From: "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
If anyone has a scanner and can make a pdf.....
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
flylightning
Sent: 02 November 2009 16:54
Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning on the Cover of Sport Pilot
To Group,
The Lightning LS-1 is on the cover of the November issue of Sport Pilot
mag. Good article and some great photos.
Nick Otterback
Arion
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 02, 2009
Subject: Re: Lightning on the Cover of Sport Pilot
In a message dated 11/2/2009 4:22:55 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
clive.james(at)uk.bp.com writes:
If anyone has a scanner and can make a pdf.....
Good idea Clive, as I haven't received my November Sport Pilot yet. So if
anyone has their November issue and can scan the article and photos and
then post to the list, that would benefit lots of anxious Lightning readers.
Blue Skies,
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 03, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: November List Fund Raiser
A couple of years ago I implemented an automatic "squelch button" of sorts for
the Fund Raiser messages. Here's how it works... As soon as a List member makes
a Contribution through the Matronics Fund Raiser web site, he or she will
instantly cease to receive these Fund Raiser messages for the rest of the month!
Its just that simple. Don't you wish PBS worked that way! :-)
I really do appreciate each and every one of your individual Contributions to support
the Lists. It is your support that enables me to upgrade the hardware
and software that are required to run a List Site such as this one. It also goes
to pay for the commercial-grade Internet connection and to pay the huge electric
bill to keep the computer gear running and the air conditioner powered
on. I run all of the Matronics Email List and Forums sites here locally which
allows me to control and monitor every aspect of the system for the utmost in
reliably and performance.
Your personal Contribution matters because, when combined with other Listers such
as yourself, it pays the bills to keep this site up and running. I accept
exactly ZERO advertising dollars for the Matronics Lists sites. I can't stand
the pop-up ads and all other commercials that are so prevalent on the Internet
these days and I particularly don't want to have it on my Email List sites.
If you appreciate the ad-free, grass-roots, down-home feel of the Matronics Email
Lists, please make a Contribution to keep it that way!!
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
[Note that there are certain circumstances where you might still see a Contribution
related message. For example, if someone replies to one of the messages,
when using the List Browse feature, or when accessing List message via the Forum.
The system keys on the given email address and since most of these are anonymous
public access methods, there is no simple way to filter them.]
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 05, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Reminder
Dear Listers,
Just a quick reminder that November is the annual List Fund Raiser. The Matronics
Lists are 100% member supported and all of the operational costs are provided
for my your Contributions during this time of the year.
Your personal Contribution makes a difference and keeps all of the Matronics Email
Lists and Forums completely ad-free.
Please make your Contribution today to keep these services up and running!
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you in advance!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List and Forum Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 07, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Please Make A Contribution To Support Your Lists
Dear Listers,
There is no advertising income to support the Matronics Email Lists and Forums.
The operation is supported 100% by your personal Contributions during the November
Fund
Raiser.
Please make your Contribution today to support the continued operation and upgrade
of these services. You can pick up a really nice gift for making your Contribution
too!
You may use a Credit Card or Paypal at the Matronics Contribution Site here:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
or, you can send a personal check to the following address:
Matronics / Matt Dralle
PO Box 347
Livermore, CA 94551-0347
Thank you in advance for your generous support!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List and Forum Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
From: FamilyGage(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 07, 2009
Subject: information
Today attending an EAA sponsored lunch at Love Landings, just north of
Leesburg Florida. While in the pattern for landing I saw either an Lightning
or Esqual taking off.
If that was your jet please contact me off list.
We have a new Lightning owner here in the Spruce Creek Fly-In. As our
numbers grow in this area, I would like to get together and do some formation
work. I have a FAST Lead card.
Thanks,
Ray Gage
Esqual 83TW
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 09, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Fund Raiser List of Contributors - Please Make A Contribution
Today!
Each year at the end of the List Fund Raiser, I post a message acknowledging everyone
that so generously made a Contribution to support the Lists. Its my way
of publicly thanking everyone that took a minute to show their appreciation for
the Lists.
Won't you take a moment and assure that your name is on that List of Contributors
(LOC)? As a number of members have pointed out over the years, the List seems
at least - if not a whole lot more - valuable as a building/flying/recreating/entertainment
tool as your typical magazine subscription!
Please take minute and assure that your name is on this year's LOC! Show others
that you appreciate the Lists. Making a Contribution to support the Lists is
fast and easy using your Credit card or Paypal on the Secure Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
or by dropping a personal check in the mail to:
Matt Dralle / Matronics
PO Box 347
Livermore CA 94551-0347
I would like to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution thus
far in this year's List Fund Raiser! Remember that its YOUR support that keeps
these Lists going and improving! Don't forget to include a little comment about
how the Lists have helped you!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pete Krotje" <pete(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Sport Pilot Article Segment 2
Date: Nov 09, 2009
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pete Krotje" <pete(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Sport Pilot Article
Date: Nov 09, 2009
See attached first segment
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Pete Krotje" <pete(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Sport Pilot Article Segment 3
Date: Nov 09, 2009
________________________________________________________________________________
From: EAFerguson(at)AOL.COM
Date: Nov 09, 2009
Subject: Re: Sport Pilot Article Segment 3
Pete,
Great article. Thanks for the advance copy!
Earl
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Thanks Pete, I joined them up
Date: Nov 09, 2009
From: "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Regards, Clive
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jabiru Chile" <info(at)jabiru.cl>
Subject: Sport Pilot Article Segment 3
Date: Nov 09, 2009
Thank you Pete for share this information.
Christian Tannen
Jabiru Chile
_____
De: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] En nombre de Pete Krotje
Enviado el: Monday, November 09, 2009 11:12 AM
Para: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Asunto: Lightning-List: Sport Pilot Article Segment 3
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rick Bowen <rollnloop(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Sport Pilot Article Segment 3
Date: Nov 10, 2009
Very good article guys!
One thing though....that pic of "Mark Phillips"........Man=2C I think Mark
spent too much time in Shelbyville=2C he looks just like "Moostang Mike"!!
Wonder if Mr. Phillips likes country music and fast cars????
Rick
N727RB
From: pete(at)flylightning.net
Subject: Lightning-List: Sport Pilot Article Segment 3
Date: Mon=2C 9 Nov 2009 08:11:36 -0600
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Another Lightning FLies!
Date: Nov 10, 2009
To Group,
I am not sure if this is 48 or 49 but N327AL Arion's new Exp Demo flew today
for the first time. An uneventful first flight, all total 2 hours of flying
today.
This plane has a real neat feature, Wig Wag Lighting. We have a light pocket
in each wing, with AeroLed's MicroSuns. With these lights you can wire them
together and than run a switch to get a Wig Wag function.
Looks real good on approach I hear and is visible for a long distance.
Initial performance with no fairings is as follows;
@4,500'
2850RPM 123kntsTAS
2950RPM 127kntsTAS
Fuel flow in the 5.5-6 range but is a bit rich right now will tune tomorrow.
Nick
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Date: Nov 10, 2009
Subject: Re: Another Lightning FLies!
In a message dated 11/10/2009 6:25:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
info(at)flylightning.net writes:
To Group,
I am not sure if this is 48 or 49 but N327AL Arion=99s new Exp Demo
flew
today for the first time. An uneventful first flight, all total 2 hours
of
flying today.
This plane has a real neat feature, Wig Wag Lighting. We have a light
pocket in each wing, with AeroLed=99s MicroSuns. With these lights
you can wire
them together and than run a switch to get a Wig Wag function.
Looks real good on approach I hear and is visible for a long distance.
Initial performance with no fairings is as follows;
@4,500=99
2850RPM 123kntsTAS
2950RPM 127kntsTAS
Fuel flow in the 5.5-6 range but is a bit rich right now will tune
tomorrow.
Nick
Good Job Guys!!
Is this going to be the fastest yet or is it going to be a slow racehorse
?
Or is this the one with the NOx system?
Doug
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 11, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: List Fund Raiser
Dear Listers,
Just a reminder that November is the Matronics Email List Fund Raiser month. There
are some very nice incentive gifts to choose from as well!
Please make your Contribution today:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Modified long wing tips
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 11, 2009
I saw a picture, I think it may have been from Sun n Fun, of a Lightning that had
cut-down long wingtips.
I'm interested in making similar tips for my Lightning, and would appreciate it
if an owner of a Lightning with these tips would offer some insight as to the
process.
Pictures are worth a thousand words, so they would be helpful and require you to
type a lot less!
Thanks,
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272287#272287
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Prop balancing
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 11, 2009
I fabricated the brackets to mount my dyna-vibe prop balancing sensors to the Jabiru
yesterday. I got everything mounted just as I was running out of time,
so I only ran the engine briefly to measure vibration at 2000 rpm. I haven't
actually gotten to do the balancing part yet.
But the reading was pretty shocking. I was showing .38 IPS at 2000 RPM. That's
pretty high. The plane feels very smooth though!
The sensors are mounted directly to the engine so I'm guessing that the smoothness
is due in large part to a very effective engine mount and perhaps some natural
dampening of the composite fuselage.
My Grumman felt positively buzzy at .26 IPS and felt MUCH less smooth than my Lightning
does even though my Lightning is showing a higher vibration level at
the engine itself. Once I got the Grumman to .05 IPS it was silky smooth.
So, I'm thinking that when I get the Jabiru down in that range coupled with the
obviously better engine vibration isolation in the mount/fuselage of my Lightning
that I'll only be able to tell the engine is running by the noise or looking
at the EFIS. ;)
I'll post my results after I actually balance it and test fly it tomorrow.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272288#272288
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kayberg(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 11, 2009
Subject: Re: Modified long wing tips
In a message dated 11/11/2009 3:40:00 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Bill Strahan"
I saw a picture, I think it may have been from Sun n Fun, of a Lightning
that had cut-down long wingtips.
I'm interested in making similar tips for my Lightning, and would
appreciate it if an owner of a Lightning with these tips would offer some insight
as to the process.
Pictures are worth a thousand words, so they would be helpful and require
you to type a lot less!
Thanks,
Bill
Bill, you probably saw one that was from the Green Landings build center.
While Ryan has developed some methods of doing the cut-down, it is just a
"butcher and fill" job that takes many hours to do. You have to hack
them apart and epoxy back together. No special tricks. It is critical to
get the alignment and washout right, tho
It is my observation that build centers develop proprietary techniques that
offer incentives to use their facilities. Consequently, they dont tend
to disclose their "tricks" . In this case there is not much of a trick.
Just annoying work.
Doug Koenigsberg
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Stauffer" <mark(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Prop balancing
Date: Nov 11, 2009
It's amazing what you can accomplish when you actually take your plane
home!! ;-)
Anybody interested in a nice yellow Grumman?
All in fun.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Bill
Strahan
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 2:51 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Prop balancing
I fabricated the brackets to mount my dyna-vibe prop balancing sensors to
the Jabiru yesterday. I got everything mounted just as I was running out of
time, so I only ran the engine briefly to measure vibration at 2000 rpm. I
haven't actually gotten to do the balancing part yet.
But the reading was pretty shocking. I was showing .38 IPS at 2000 RPM.
That's pretty high. The plane feels very smooth though!
The sensors are mounted directly to the engine so I'm guessing that the
smoothness is due in large part to a very effective engine mount and perhaps
some natural dampening of the composite fuselage.
My Grumman felt positively buzzy at .26 IPS and felt MUCH less smooth than
my Lightning does even though my Lightning is showing a higher vibration
level at the engine itself. Once I got the Grumman to .05 IPS it was silky
smooth.
So, I'm thinking that when I get the Jabiru down in that range coupled with
the obviously better engine vibration isolation in the mount/fuselage of my
Lightning that I'll only be able to tell the engine is running by the noise
or looking at the EFIS. ;)
I'll post my results after I actually balance it and test fly it tomorrow.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272288#272288
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Johnny Thompson" <8wn(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Prop balancing
Date: Nov 11, 2009
Bill
Looks like you will have no problem bringing the ips below .07. I have been
balancing props for a while and would like to have more info from you.
What type of prop? Ground adjustable or fixed?
What type of spinner. Composite or metal?
What engine, solid or hydraulic.
Hours on engine?
I have found much worse on a Lighting I am working with. Static RPM was
2675.
First run was 3.5 ips. That is twice as high as any I have ever seen and way
over the maximum. Prop was pulled, ground adjustable, sent to factory for
rework and returned. Next run was about 2.8. Composite spinner was removed
and vibe was .8+-. Balanced to about .35. New metal spinner was installed
and will run a new balance soon. Engine is solid lifters at about 250
hours. I will be doing a balance on my Lightning in the next week.
Hope more will start having their aircraft dynamic balanced. It is worth the
cost.
Johnny Thompson
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 1:50 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Prop balancing
>
> I fabricated the brackets to mount my dyna-vibe prop balancing sensors to
> the Jabiru yesterday. I got everything mounted just as I was running out
> of time, so I only ran the engine briefly to measure vibration at 2000
> rpm. I haven't actually gotten to do the balancing part yet.
>
> But the reading was pretty shocking. I was showing .38 IPS at 2000 RPM.
> That's pretty high. The plane feels very smooth though!
>
> The sensors are mounted directly to the engine so I'm guessing that the
> smoothness is due in large part to a very effective engine mount and
> perhaps some natural dampening of the composite fuselage.
>
> My Grumman felt positively buzzy at .26 IPS and felt MUCH less smooth than
> my Lightning does even though my Lightning is showing a higher vibration
> level at the engine itself. Once I got the Grumman to .05 IPS it was
> silky smooth.
>
> So, I'm thinking that when I get the Jabiru down in that range coupled
> with the obviously better engine vibration isolation in the mount/fuselage
> of my Lightning that I'll only be able to tell the engine is running by
> the noise or looking at the EFIS. ;)
>
> I'll post my results after I actually balance it and test fly it tomorrow.
>
> Bill
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272288#272288
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Stauffer" <mark(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Another Lightning Flies!
Date: Nov 11, 2009
N327AL is SN 86 and the 48th to fly. Currently we've delivered 82 kits (7
serial numbers were not used for various reasons). With that in mind we
currently have a 58.5% completion rate over the last 3.5 years. To put that
into perspective the industry average of original purchasers actually
completing their kits is below 25%. As far as I know all of our completions
have been by the original purchasers.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of flylightning
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 5:19 PM
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Lightning-List: Another Lightning FLies!
To Group,
I am not sure if this is 48 or 49 but N327AL Arion's new Exp Demo flew
today for the first time. An uneventful first flight, all total 2 hours of
flying today.
This plane has a real neat feature, Wig Wag Lighting. We have a light
pocket in each wing, with AeroLed's MicroSuns. With these lights you can
wire them together and than run a switch to get a Wig Wag function.
Looks real good on approach I hear and is visible for a long distance.
Initial performance with no fairings is as follows;
@4,500'
2850RPM 123kntsTAS
2950RPM 127kntsTAS
Fuel flow in the 5.5-6 range but is a bit rich right now will tune
tomorrow.
Nick
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Prop balancing
Date: Nov 11, 2009
Bill=2C I too am very interested in your prop balancing. Perhaps you can
write a little something for the newsletter as I believe this would help ev
erybody enjoy their aircraft more and over 1000+ hours is bound to help you
r engine life and reliability. Thanks=2C Brian W.
> Subject: Lightning-List: Prop balancing
> From: bill(at)gdsx.com
> Date: Wed=2C 11 Nov 2009 00:50:52 -0800
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> I fabricated the brackets to mount my dyna-vibe prop balancing sensors to
the Jabiru yesterday. I got everything mounted just as I was running out
of time=2C so I only ran the engine briefly to measure vibration at 2000 rp
m. I haven't actually gotten to do the balancing part yet.
>
> But the reading was pretty shocking. I was showing .38 IPS at 2000 RPM.
That's pretty high. The plane feels very smooth though!
>
> The sensors are mounted directly to the engine so I'm guessing that the s
moothness is due in large part to a very effective engine mount and perhaps
some natural dampening of the composite fuselage.
>
> My Grumman felt positively buzzy at .26 IPS and felt MUCH less smooth tha
n my Lightning does even though my Lightning is showing a higher vibration
level at the engine itself. Once I got the Grumman to .05 IPS it was silky
smooth.
>
> So=2C I'm thinking that when I get the Jabiru down in that range coupled
with the obviously better engine vibration isolation in the mount/fuselage
of my Lightning that I'll only be able to tell the engine is running by the
noise or looking at the EFIS. =3B)
>
> I'll post my results after I actually balance it and test fly it tomorrow
.
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272288#272288
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Bob Haas" <checkpoint2(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Modified long wing tips
Date: Nov 11, 2009
The Lightning in question N330BH, is mine. The
workmanship is very good, there is only
one seam that can be seen if you know where to look. Bob Haas.
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Kayberg(at)aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 6:52 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Modified long wing tips
In a message dated 11/11/2009 3:40:00 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
I saw a picture, I think it may have been from Sun n Fun, of a Lightning
that had cut-down long wingtips.
I'm interested in making similar tips for my Lightning, and would appreciate
it if an owner of a Lightning with these tips would offer some insight as to
the process.
Pictures are worth a thousand words, so they would be helpful and require
you to type a lot less!
Thanks,
Bill
Bill, you probably saw one that was from the Green Landings build center.
While Ryan has developed some methods of doing the cut-down, it is just a
"butcher and fill" job that takes many hours to do. You have to hack them
apart and epoxy back together. No special tricks. It is critical to get
the alignment and washout right, tho
It is my observation that build centers develop proprietary techniques that
offer incentives to use their facilities. Consequently, they dont tend to
disclose their "tricks" . In this case there is not much of a trick. Just
annoying work.
Doug Koenigsberg
07:40:00
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 11, 2009
Subject: Re: Modified long wing tips
From: Steven Sundquist <sttwig(at)gmail.com>
That was done by Green Landings. I inquired about the process and didn't
get a response. You might have better luck.
Steve Sundquist
Kit #48
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Bill Strahan wrote:
>
> I saw a picture, I think it may have been from Sun n Fun, of a Lightning
> that had cut-down long wingtips.
>
> I'm interested in making similar tips for my Lightning, and would
> appreciate it if an owner of a Lightning with these tips would offer some
> insight as to the process.
>
> Pictures are worth a thousand words, so they would be helpful and require
> you to type a lot less!
>
> Thanks,
> Bill
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272287#272287
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Hal Wolyn <nylowinc(at)mac.com>
Subject: Re: Modified long wing tips
Date: Nov 11, 2009
Hey, anybody out there that has a FINISHED Lightning for sale?
Need a good-faster LSA than is on the market. Due to a minor medical
fear that our dear FED will cancel my certificate I am going LSA and
just put my Bonanza up for sale. Not too good at working on "things"
so the request for a done plane.
Haven`t flown in one..but saw one about a year ago at CGZ during a fly
in and was very impressed.
Thanks,
Hal
nylowinc(at)mac.com
On Nov 11, 2009, at 11:30 AM, Steven Sundquist wrote:
> That was done by Green Landings. I inquired about the process and
> didn't get a response. You might have better luck.
>
> Steve Sundquist
> Kit #48
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Bill Strahan wrote:
>
> I saw a picture, I think it may have been from Sun n Fun, of a
> Lightning that had cut-down long wingtips.
>
> I'm interested in making similar tips for my Lightning, and would
> appreciate it if an owner of a Lightning with these tips would offer
> some insight as to the process.
>
> Pictures are worth a thousand words, so they would be helpful and
> require you to type a lot less!
>
> Thanks,
> Bill
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272287#272287
> -= * AeroElectric www.aeroelectric.com
> omebuiltHELP www.homebuilthelp.com
> http:/r generous support!
> Matronics List Features Navigator to browse
> s.com/Navigator?Lightning-List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
> ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
> =============
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 11, 2009
From: Marvin Williams <marvinlnaz(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Modified long wing tips
Hal,=0A=0AI believe this one is still available on Barnstormers.com...=0A
=0A=0A=0A2008 LIGHTNING =A2 $85,000 =A2 CHECK THIS OUT
=A2 Jabiru 3300, 120 hp, Grand Rapids EFIS & EIS, TruTrak DigiFlight II=0A
2 axis Auto Pilot, Garmin SL30, Garmin GTX327 xponder, PS Eng.=0Aintercom,
AvMap EKP 4 GPS linked to EFIS & AP, electric trim &=0Aflaps, LED wing tip
strobes/nav lights, dual boarding steps and=0Aextended wing tips. Excellent
workmanship. Can be flown by Sport=0APilots. Will trade for IFR Archer. Pl
ease call Gary 520-850-7527 =A2=0AContact Gary W. Pennington, Owner -
located Tucson, AZ USA =A2 Telephone: 520-850-7527 =A2 Posted
October 18, 2009 =A2 Show all Ads posted by this Advertiser
=A2 Recommend This Ad to a Friend =A2 Email Advertiser =A2 Save
to Watchlist =A2 Report This Ad =A2 View Larger Pictures =0A
=0A =0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Hal Wolyn <nylowinc@m
ac.com>=0ATo: lightning-list(at)matronics.com=0ASent: Wed, November 11, 2009 1
:06:44 PM=0ASubject: Re: Lightning-List: Modified long wing tips=0A=0AHey,
anybody out there that has a FINISHED Lightning for sale?=0A=0ANeed a good
-faster LSA than is on the market. Due to a minor medical fear that our de
ar FED will cancel my certificate I am going LSA and just put my Bonanza up
for sale. Not too good at working on "things" so the request for a done p
lane.=0A=0AHaven`t flown in one..but saw one about a year ago at CGZ during
a fly in and was very impressed.=0A=0AThanks,=0A=0AHal =0Anylowinc(at)mac.com
=0A=0A=0A=0A =0A=0AOn Nov 11, 2009, at 11:30 AM, Steven Sundquist wrote:=0A
=0AThat was done by Green Landings. I inquired about the process and didn'
t get a response. You might have better luck.=0A> =0A>Steve Sundquist=0A>K
it #48=0A>=0A>=0A>On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Bill Strahan =0A>>=0A>>I saw a picture, I think it may have been from Sun n
Fun, of a Lightning that had cut-down long wingtips.=0A>>=0A>>I'm interest
ed in making similar tips for my Lightning, and would appreciate it if an o
wner of a Lightning with these tips would offer some insight as to the proc
ess.=0A>>=0A>>Pictures are worth a thousand words, so they would be helpful
and require you to type a lot less!=0A>>=0A>>Thanks,=0A>>Bill=0A>>=0A>>=0A
>>=0A>>=0A>>Read this topic online here:=0A>>=0A>>http://forums.matronics.c
om/viewtopic.php?p=272287#272287=0A>>=0A>>=0A-= * AeroElectric www.
aeroelectric.com=0A>>omebuiltHELP www.homebuilthelp.com=0A>>http://www.matr
onics.com/contribution=0A>>ronics.com/" target="_blank">http://forums.mat
ronics.com=0A>>===============0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A
>>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
>=0A>href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com=0A>href=
"http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com>=0A>href="http://www
.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contributionhref="h
ttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronics.com/
Navigator?Lightning-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.
matronics.com =0A>=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Stauffer" <mark(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Looking for finished Lightning
Date: Nov 11, 2009
Hal,
Our company demonstrator, N325AL is for sale. This is a certified S-LSA
built buy us here in Shelbyville, TN. Please visit our web site for more
information: www.flylightning.net. I've also attached a flyer for the
airplane.
If you have any other questions please feel free to contact us.
Best regards,
Mark
Mark Stauffer
Production Manager
Arion Aircraft
2842 Hwy 231 North
Shelbyville, TN 37160
(931) 680-1781
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Hal Wolyn
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 2:07 PM
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Modified long wing tips
Hey, anybody out there that has a FINISHED Lightning for sale?
Need a good-faster LSA than is on the market. Due to a minor medical fear
that our dear FED will cancel my certificate I am going LSA and just put my
Bonanza up for sale. Not too good at working on "things" so the request for
a done plane.
Haven`t flown in one..but saw one about a year ago at CGZ during a fly in
and was very impressed.
Thanks,
Hal
nylowinc(at)mac.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Catalpa Aviation" <catalpaaviation(at)wideband.net.au>
Subject: Prop balancing
Date: Nov 12, 2009
Hullo all,
Prop and engine balancing problems.
I have found that the Jabiru engines with solid lifters are fairly smooth
and the early hydraulic ones run harshly. I have had both engines in my
flying school over the years, both 2.2 engines.
We have had both the 4 and 6 cylinder hydraulic engines self destruct at
about 400-450 hours due to the harshness in the engine (vibration). The fix
is to (A) turn them back into solid lifter engine (B) replace the cam with
the latest 260 cam or (C) a 3 blade prop (wood or composite, hides the
vibration, does not stop self destruction). To turn them into solid lifter
engines requires the lifter to have a slug fitted and the rockers to have a
screw and locknut as per the solid lifter engine. We have done both a 4 and
6 cylinder engines so far with great results, very smooth running, lower
EGT, CHT and oil temps and oh more power. Fitting the latest cam means
taking the engine to pieces, do this with high time engines (say over 400
hours) as you will probably find crankcase wear around the main bearings and
cam at the 5-6 cylinder area. If your engine has broken a through bolt
(happened to me on my 4 and a friend with his 6 both above the fuel pump)
the crankcases WILL need machining, the engine has just self destructed.
After saying the above I would not have any other engine, the Jabiru is
still going through birthing pains and is a great engine. As a side note I
have just ordered a J250 kit, my second kit as I have already built a
Lightning.
Anthony
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Whittingham
Sent: Thursday, 12 November 2009 1:36 AM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Prop balancing
Bill,
I too am very interested in your prop balancing. Perhaps you can write a
little something for the newsletter as I believe this would help everybody
enjoy their aircraft more and over 1000+ hours is bound to help your engine
life and reliability. Thanks, Brian W.
> Subject: Lightning-List: Prop balancing
> From: bill(at)gdsx.com
> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:50:52 -0800
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
>
>
> I fabricated the brackets to mount my dyna-vibe prop balancing sensors to
the Jabiru yesterday. I got everything mounted just as I was running out of
time, so I only ran the engine briefly to measure vibration at 2000 rpm. I
haven't actually gotten to do the balancing part yet.
>
> But the reading was pretty shocking. I was showing .38 IPS at 2000 RPM.
That's pretty high. The plane feels very smooth though!
>
> The sensors are mounted directly to the engine so I'm guessing that the
smoothness is due in large part to a very effective engine mount and perhaps
some natural dampening of the composite fuselage.
>
> My Grumman felt positively buzzy at .26 IPS and felt MUCH less smooth than
my Lightning does even though my Lightning is showing a higher vibration
level at the engine itself. Once I got the Grumman to .05 IPS it was silky
smooth.
>
> So, I'm thinking that when I get the Jabiru down in that range coupled
with the obviously better engine vibration isolation in the mount/fuselage
of my Lightning that I'll only be able to tell the engine is running by the
noise or looking at the EFIS. ;)
>
> I'll post my results after I actually balance it and test fly it tomorrow.
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272288#272288
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>======================
&g===================
>
>
>
_____
Hotmail: Trusted email GBL/go/177141664/direct/01/ ' target='_new'>Sign up
now.
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Prop balancing
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 11, 2009
mark(at)flylightning.net wrote:
> It's amazing what you can accomplish when you actually take your plane
> home!! ;-)
>
> Anybody interested in a nice yellow Grumman?
>
> All in fun.
>
> Mark
>
> --
And here I thought we were friends. Sniffle sniffle. :)
Actually, I was at my hangar today doing misc work and my partner in the Grumman
dropped by. I had him jump in the plane with me and found out I can't shut
the canopy with him in it! He's 6'4" and the canopy hit his head without a headset
on! We pulled the cushions out, and I think he might be okay so if all
goes well I'll bring him out once I get my 40 hours and he'll fly the Grumman
back.
It sure is nice to have it 20 minutes away. I can work on the plane during the
day and still be home when my kids get home from school. Perfect!
I also spent some time on the balance and got it down to .18 before I again had
to call it a day. With the accelerometer mounted on the VERY front of the engine
it will be very sensitive, so I should be able to achieve that turbine-like
smoothness I'm after.
As to other posts on this thread, how can I verify the profile cam that I have
on my engine?
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272405#272405
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Modified long wing tips
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 11, 2009
sttwig wrote:
> That was done by Green Landings. I inquired about the process and didn't get
a response. You might have better luck.
>
> Steve Sundquist
> Kit #48
>
> [b]
I sent an email to them, but have not heard back. I can see many ways of doing
it, just would like to see some pictures of the process if possible.
I'm sure Green Landings is proud of their process, but I wouldn't think this is
an element of intellectual property that really would make the decision on which
center you would choose.
When I do it I'll share some pictures. Unless I butcher it. Then I'll just ask
for sympathy. :)
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272406#272406
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kayberg(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 12, 2009
Subject: Re: Modified long wing tips
In a message dated 11/12/2009 12:23:28 AM Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
I sent an email to them, but have not heard back. I can see many ways of
doing it, just would like to see some pictures of the process if possible.
I'm sure Green Landings is proud of their process, but I wouldn't think
this is an element of intellectual property that really would make the
decision on which center you would choose.
When I do it I'll share some pictures. Unless I butcher it. Then I'll
just ask for sympathy. :)
Bill
I talked to Ryan today and he is looking for pictures of how he does the
wingtips. Not sure he has any. If he does he plans to post them.
It is not about intellectual property as much as trying to offer perks to
those who pay for a facility and advice. Build centers need income to stay
in business and many of the techniques come at a price. Someone has to put
in the hours at some expense to perfect the ways to do things. The
folks at Shelbyville profit from selling kits, so it is in their best interest
to make the kits as easy to build as possible. So they spend the money on
developing a manual and their techniques. Green Landings only gets a
slice of their pie when it comes to kit sales and needs to make additional money
somehow.
Individual builders are doing it for fun. Easy for them to share. But
when you feed your kids by selling airplane kits, trying to be the best
build center and offering the best of design improvements; it is a little
tougher to give away your ideas.
Doug
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Modified long wing tips
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 12, 2009
"...a little tougher to give away your ideas."
Doug, sounds like intellectual property to me. :)
I wasn't trying to be negative by characterizing it that way. If someone came
calling asking me how I did specific things in my software business, in particular
things that differentiate us within our industry, I would not be willing
to share that. I would be giving away IP at that point.
I was simply thinking that this particular modification didn't strike me as particularly
valuable across the market of potential builders, and a great deal of
the value is in the work itself, not the knowledge of how to do it.
Perhaps I'm wrong. If so, it won't be a hallmark moment, it's happened before.
It's certainly Ryan's choice as to what he shares.
So, back to the topic at hand. At this point, I'm thinking I'll take the tips
and cut them to the size I want for my plane. Then I'll split them along the
leading edge so they can open up to take up some of the difference between the
smaller airfoil that will exist at the point I cut them compared to end of the
wing.
Then I'll bond a 4 strip thick layer of fiberglass about 2" wide to the inside
of the cut down tip to create the flange that will allow me to attach it to the
end of the wing. I'll attach it in place with screws, and have a big gap in
the front that I will fill with a block of easily sandable foam. I'll wrap the
end of the wing with some old .016 aluminum I have laying around to protect
it, and then sand the leading edge to shape.
Remove all of that from the wing, sand the foam down about a 1/16 and then 3 layers
of glass over that. Sand. Fill. Sand. Fill...etc.
If that description makes sense, any feedback on it?
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272538#272538
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 12, 2009
Anyone else experiencing very different EGTs at full throttle? I will see one
set of cylinders running 1300-1390 and the other side 980-1050.
2,4,6 are the cold ones. 1,3,5 are the hot ones. As soon as I throttle back,
the EGT drops on the hot side and comes up on the cold side until they're all
within about 30 degrees.
This occurs at all altitudes, and is particularly troublesome because I can't run
full throttle at altitude. At 12,500 the hot side is hot as ever, but the
cold side is all in the 900s and the engine is pretty rough. Worst I've seen
is just over 1400 on #5 while running 950 on #4. In that situation, as soon as
I pulled the throttle back to about 5 gph #5 dropped to 1370 and #4 came up
to 1360!
While it's fun to put along at 4 gph at 12,500 doing close to 140 mph, I'd much
rather be able to run it a bit harder...and when I grab the O2 bottle and head
the higher altitudes this will become more important.
Anyone else experienced this and fixed it?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272541#272541
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Catalpa Aviation" <catalpaaviation(at)wideband.net.au>
Subject: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
Date: Nov 14, 2009
Check the inlet manifolds for air leak around the area where the inlets exit
the mix box and that the black joining hose is centre and clamped.
Anthony
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Strahan
Sent: Friday, 13 November 2009 12:54 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
Anyone else experiencing very different EGTs at full throttle? I will see
one set of cylinders running 1300-1390 and the other side 980-1050.
2,4,6 are the cold ones. 1,3,5 are the hot ones. As soon as I throttle
back, the EGT drops on the hot side and comes up on the cold side until
they're all within about 30 degrees.
This occurs at all altitudes, and is particularly troublesome because I
can't run full throttle at altitude. At 12,500 the hot side is hot as ever,
but the cold side is all in the 900s and the engine is pretty rough. Worst
I've seen is just over 1400 on #5 while running 950 on #4. In that
situation, as soon as I pulled the throttle back to about 5 gph #5 dropped
to 1370 and #4 came up to 1360!
While it's fun to put along at 4 gph at 12,500 doing close to 140 mph, I'd
much rather be able to run it a bit harder...and when I grab the O2 bottle
and head the higher altitudes this will become more important.
Anyone else experienced this and fixed it?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272541#272541
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "JOSEPH MATHIAS LINDA MATHIAS" <lbmathias(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
Date: Nov 12, 2009
Bill,
I am having a similar experience; the left side (particularly 4 and 6)
run in the 1100's during full throttle climb while the right side runs in
the high 1300's and sometimes over 1400 during climb. When I reduce power
in cruise, they get closer but generally run 100-150 degrees difference
between the two sides.
I tried an insert in the scat hose connected to the carb but it didn't
change anything. I now have a couple fiberglas tubes to insert between scat
and carb intake. Haven't been able to get them on yet but hope to soon to
see if that makes a difference.
I'll let you know how it turns out.
Linda
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 8:54 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
>
> Anyone else experiencing very different EGTs at full throttle? I will see
> one set of cylinders running 1300-1390 and the other side 980-1050.
>
> 2,4,6 are the cold ones. 1,3,5 are the hot ones. As soon as I throttle
> back, the EGT drops on the hot side and comes up on the cold side until
> they're all within about 30 degrees.
>
> This occurs at all altitudes, and is particularly troublesome because I
> can't run full throttle at altitude. At 12,500 the hot side is hot as
> ever, but the cold side is all in the 900s and the engine is pretty rough.
> Worst I've seen is just over 1400 on #5 while running 950 on #4. In that
> situation, as soon as I pulled the throttle back to about 5 gph #5 dropped
> to 1370 and #4 came up to 1360!
>
> While it's fun to put along at 4 gph at 12,500 doing close to 140 mph, I'd
> much rather be able to run it a bit harder...and when I grab the O2 bottle
> and head the higher altitudes this will become more important.
>
> Anyone else experienced this and fixed it?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272541#272541
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 12, 2009
catalpaaviation(at)wideba wrote:
> Check the inlet manifolds for air leak around the area where the inlets exit
> the mix box and that the black joining hose is centre and clamped.
>
> Anthony
>
> --
Not sure how I'd check for this. Also, does it make sense that this only happens
at full throttle?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272558#272558
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Catalpa Aviation" <catalpaaviation(at)wideband.net.au>
Subject: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
Date: Nov 14, 2009
Hullo Bill,
To check inlets (by the way this happened to me) take off rubber joiners on
inlets and then try and shift the tube by hand to the intake distributor, if
it moves most likely it is leaking. The tubes have a rubber "O" ring but
sometimes it leaks, they don't always seal, I took the tubes out and cleaned
etc and replaced them using heat resistant silicon, that worked, the one
cylinder that was lean then was the same as the rest. The other thing you
could try is to check that the inlets where they bolt to the head have
gaskets and they are working. I have heard that the bolts sometimes are too
long and bottom out before the inlet (or exhaust) pipes are tight. Check
bolt length by removing one bolt and measuring hole depth. Yes it would
make sense that at full throttle it would run lean as the engine is working
harder. The only other thing is, is the air that flows around the cylinders
inhibited in any way as it exits, in other words have you placed a cover
around the fuel pump? If so remove it.
Best of luck
Anthony
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Strahan
Sent: Friday, 13 November 2009 3:44 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
catalpaaviation(at)wideba wrote:
> Check the inlet manifolds for air leak around the area where the inlets
exit
> the mix box and that the black joining hose is centre and clamped.
>
> Anthony
>
> --
Not sure how I'd check for this. Also, does it make sense that this only
happens at full throttle?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272558#272558
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 13, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Some Very Nice Comments...
Dear Listers,
I've been getting some really nice comments from Listers along with their List
Support Contributions. I've shared some of them below. Please read them over
and see what your fellow Listers think of the Lists and Forums.
Please make a Contribution today to support the continued upgrade and operation
of these services.
There are lots of sweet gifts available, so browse the extensive selection and
pickup a nice item along with your qualifying Contribution.
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you in advance for your generous support! It is very much appreciated!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
----------- What Listers Are Saying About The Lists -----------
Few things in life bring more usefulness than the List. This
is worth every penny!
Stephen T.
I have enjoyed the list for way too many years, but continue
to get closer to flying my project with the help of listers.
C.L.
Thanks for this List. It's been a great source of encouragement
and information.
Arden A.
Great service!
Gerald T.
It's always interesting reading the lists and I've gotten some
good help from the issues and answers there.
Steve T.
Been a member of the List for 12 years. Keep up the good work.
John H.
Great Site!
Harry M.
Great source of information...
Martin H.
Thanks for providing this great service!
Jeff P.
I continue to get and give information through these lists.
Ralph C.
This is a wonderful resource!
Warren H.
This is what inernet was meant for, sharing information and
experience. Michael W.
Thanks for making such a good list!
Fred D.
Thanks for running a great service!
Michael F.
I really appreciate it.
Dan H.
Thanks for the great service.
Michael L.
Thanks for maintaining this great resource.
John C.
Your sites have been a great resourses and an introduction
to many competent aircraft designers and fabricators.
Jon M.
Thanks for all that you do to maintain the Matronics forums
and for the personal help that you have been to me in
answering my questions regarding the use of the forums.
William B.
[The List] helped me get flying, fly off my test hours and
make my systems better. Ralph C.
The Universe is a better place because of you.
Eric J.
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 13, 2009
From: Gerd + Uli Nowack <NowackLinden(at)gmx.de>
Subject: New kid on the blog
Another Lightning took to the skies on wednesday 11, taking off at
Chicago O`Hare airport to fly nonstop all the way to Frankfurt Rhein
Main A/P.
Not on its own wings, though, but in a crate aboard a MD11 Freighter of
Lufthansa Cargo. It arrived safely , sits now in front of my garage in
Linden near Giessen and waits to be assembled in the spare time I can
find in the months( or years) to come.
My name is Gerd (pronounced Garret) Nowack , age 54 and I have been an
active pilot, private and professional, since 1976.
So here are my greetings from Germany as a new member of the Lightning list!
Gerd
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Daniel DW <ddw55(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: New kid on the blog
Date: Nov 13, 2009
Herzlich Willkommen in der Gruppe!!!
I have built an Esqual here in Belgium. (Lightning was not available at tha
t time)
I wish you good look with the construction and hope to see it flying very s
oon.
Daniel De Winter (same age as you)
Esqual PH-DWD
> Date: Fri=2C 13 Nov 2009 11:42:13 +0100
> From: NowackLinden(at)gmx.de
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Lightning-List: New kid on the blog
>
.de>
>
> Another Lightning took to the skies on wednesday 11=2C taking off at
> Chicago O`Hare airport to fly nonstop all the way to Frankfurt Rhein
> Main A/P.
> Not on its own wings=2C though=2C but in a crate aboard a MD11 Freighter
of
> Lufthansa Cargo. It arrived safely =2C sits now in front of my garage in
> Linden near Giessen and waits to be assembled in the spare time I can
> find in the months( or years) to come.
> My name is Gerd (pronounced Garret) Nowack =2C age 54 and I have been an
> active pilot=2C private and professional=2C since 1976.
> So here are my greetings from Germany as a new member of the Lightning li
st!
>
> Gerd
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Hebben jij en je vrienden leuke foto's van jullie feestje? Maak een groepsa
lbum en geniet nog extra na.
http://www.microsoft.com/belux/nl/windows/windowslive/products/photos.aspx
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Date: Nov 13, 2009
Subject: Re: Modified long wing tips
In a message dated 11/12/2009 8:29:38 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Bill Strahan"
"...a little tougher to give away your ideas."
Doug, sounds like intellectual property to me. :)
I wasn't trying to be negative by characterizing it that way. If someone
came calling asking me how I did specific things in my software business,
in particular things that differentiate us within our industry, I would not
be willing to share that. I would be giving away IP at that point.
I was simply thinking that this particular modification didn't strike me
as particularly valuable across the market of potential builders, and a
great deal of the value is in the work itself, not the knowledge of how to do
it.
Perhaps I'm wrong. If so, it won't be a hallmark moment, it's happened
before.
It's certainly Ryan's choice as to what he shares
Bill, you are more than kind.
I will bug Ryan to respond to you, a couple pictures would be worth a
thousand words in this case.
I did not work on the two sets of tips that have been done so far. Your
approach is completely different that what Ryan did. Might work
better...who knows. But within a couple weeks Ryan has another set to do for
his
demo plane, you could also wait to see a few pix from that. You might
contact him privately at _ryan(at)greenlandings.com_ (mailto:ryan(at)greenlandings.com) .
Doug
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Nov 13, 2009
Subject: Re: New kid on the blog
Gerd,
Welcome to the group and congratulations on your Lightning kit
purchase. I think you are the first builder in Germany. I know you will enjoy
the build process and certainly the flight performance of your airplane when
you get it completed. Keep us updated on your progress and send some build
photos for the newsletter as you make progress.
Blue Skies,
Buz Rich
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Prop balancing
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 13, 2009
Finally got back out to the airport and worked on the plane. My initial numbers
were WAY off. The Dyna-Vibe was getting errant reflections from the shiny spinner
backplate and was reading 2-3 times the actual RPM.
Of course, the vibration measurement, in inches per second was reporting a much
lower number because it thought the prop was spinning much faster...anyway, long
story short the actual vibration was just over 1 IPS!
An even better testimony to the effectiveness of the mount, because that's shaking
pretty good.
I had it down to .05 IPS in 15 minutes and life was good. It's SMOOTH.
If anyone is close to DFW and wants to come by and make use of the mounts I fabricated
I'd be happy to accomodate them.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272771#272771
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Prop balancing
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 13, 2009
8wn(at)comcast.net wrote:
> Bill
>
> Looks like you will have no problem bringing the ips below .07. I have been
> balancing props for a while and would like to have more info from you.
> What type of prop? Ground adjustable or fixed?
> What type of spinner. Composite or metal?
> What engine, solid or hydraulic.
> Hours on engine?
>
> I have found much worse on a Lighting I am working with. Static RPM was
> 2675.
> First run was 3.5 ips. That is twice as high as any I have ever seen and way
> over the maximum. Prop was pulled, ground adjustable, sent to factory for
> rework and returned. Next run was about 2.8. Composite spinner was removed
> and vibe was .8+-. Balanced to about .35. New metal spinner was installed
> and will run a new balance soon. Engine is solid lifters at about 250
> hours. I will be doing a balance on my Lightning in the next week.
>
> Hope more will start having their aircraft dynamic balanced. It is worth the
> cost.
> Johnny Thompson
>
>
> ---
Sorry, didn't address this sooner.
What type of prop? Ground adjustable or fixed?
Fixed
What type of spinner. Composite or metal?
Metal
What engine, solid or hydraulic.
Hydraulic
Hours on engine?
32
For what it's worth, it took about 15 grams of weight on the spinner backplate
to balance it to .05 IPS.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272772#272772
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 13, 2009
I have now read on several different forums how this problem has been fixed by
creating a smooth 90 degree transition from airbox to carb instead of the spiral-wrapped
scat tubing.
There were many approaches, but the one that sounded the most interesting was the
discussion wherein an individual with a Zenair (and I have it on good authority
those are the brightest of guys!) related his solution of replacing it with
a section from a radiator hose! I found a second person confirming this was
their fix as well.
So today I stopped into my friendly NAPA store and after some convincing that I
REALLY did need to just go in the back and climb around to find the right radiator
hose I came away with a lower radiator hose from an F-250 Diesel that had
90 degree bends on BOTH ends and appeared to meet the minimum 2.125 ID that
I had come up with from a quick check on the plane.
I got it back to the hangar, and set to work on it. Unfortunately, I cut it just
a BIT too short, and was unhappy with it. It was close, but I wanted it to
fit in place even without the hose clamp holding it to make sure there was no
tension on it that would cause rapid deterioration.
So I set to work on the other end, and trimmed it in small increments...and cut
it too short as well! I then said "darn" or something quite similar.
The tube exiting my airbox is pointed forwards slightly, and when I finally got
it trimmed enough to fit, when it slid up onto the airbox tube it also slid back
and away from the carburetor.
Hmmm. Another trip to NAPA on the way home and now with two perfect examples of
a 1/4" too short piece, tomorrow should result in a working part. I'll provide
pictures and let you know what happens. The NAPA part number is 9415.
I did have to stretch the end that goes over the airbox tube slightly, but it's
just a nice snug fit on the carb.
My plan is to get it in place, taxi out and make a few aborted takeoffs to get
it nice and hot and verify that the RPM on application of full throttle is consistent.
I can't imagine there is a big enough pressure drop to squeeze the hose
in any way, since the drop across the air filter has to be tiny, but I'd rather
see it in action a few times before I commit to a trip around the pattern.
Should have news tomorrow or Sunday.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272773#272773
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "GARY PENNINGTON" <pennington(at)q.com>
Subject: Re: Prop balancing
Date: Nov 14, 2009
Good morning Johnny
How are things with you?
I'm curious. How much would it cost to balance the prop?
Thanks for your time and have a great day.
Gary Pennington
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Strahan<mailto:bill(at)gdsx.com>
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 10:06 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Prop balancing
>
8wn(at)comcast.net wrote:
> Bill
>
> Looks like you will have no problem bringing the ips below .07. I
have been
> balancing props for a while and would like to have more info from
you.
> What type of prop? Ground adjustable or fixed?
> What type of spinner. Composite or metal?
> What engine, solid or hydraulic.
> Hours on engine?
>
> I have found much worse on a Lighting I am working with. Static RPM
was
> 2675.
> First run was 3.5 ips. That is twice as high as any I have ever seen
and way
> over the maximum. Prop was pulled, ground adjustable, sent to
factory for
> rework and returned. Next run was about 2.8. Composite spinner was
removed
> and vibe was .8+-. Balanced to about .35. New metal spinner was
installed
> and will run a new balance soon. Engine is solid lifters at about
250
> hours. I will be doing a balance on my Lightning in the next week.
>
> Hope more will start having their aircraft dynamic balanced. It is
worth the
> cost.
> Johnny Thompson
>
>
> ---
Sorry, didn't address this sooner.
What type of prop? Ground adjustable or fixed?
Fixed
What type of spinner. Composite or metal?
Metal
What engine, solid or hydraulic.
Hydraulic
Hours on engine?
32
For what it's worth, it took about 15 grams of weight on the spinner
backplate to balance it to .05 IPS.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272772#272772
.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272772#272772>
www.aeroelectric.com<http://www.aeroelectric.com/>
www.buildersbooks.com<http://www.buildersbooks.com/>
www.homebuilthelp.com<http://www.homebuilthelp.com/>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
on>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
m/Navigator?Lightning-List>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Nov 14, 2009
Subject: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
Bill,
I suspect you are on the right track. When our EAA chapter had
similar problems with the Jab 3300 installation in the 601XL we built, we ended
up using a radiator hose from a Caterpillar tractor. Sorry, don't remember
the part number (that was around 2 years ago) but it solved the problem and
continues to work well.
Blue Skies,
Buz Rich
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Prop balancing
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 14, 2009
Cost? Depends on how much fuel it takes to get to Mckinney, Texas. :)
I've got the brackets, and have done this twice now and just enjoyed it. I'm happy
to have any Lightning owner (and one Zenair I know of) come by and I'll help
them do it.
It's actually VERY fast once you make the brackets:
1) remove the cowl
2) remove two plugs on the front of the engine (thanks Pete!)
3) mount the brackets there with 5/16-18 bolts
4) run the engine and take a reading. This reading will provide the vibration
in inches per second as well as information to calcualte the angular measurement
from the sensor that requires weight to be added
5) if the IPS is too high, add some weight with a washer under a spinner screw
and repeate step 4
6) take all the washers off, weigh them, and replace with lead weights inside the
spinner
7) the lead will be in a slightly different place than the washers, so do it all
again but this time you're just fine tuning with some really small washers to
get it to .05 or less
8) remove the brackets, replace the plugs with loctite
9) go fly and say "ahhhhhh" and let your headset touch the canopy and say 'wow!"
:)
Steps 4-7 took me about 15 minutes.
I'll attach a pic of the sensors mounted.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272808#272808
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/lightningpropbalance_389.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 14, 2009
We shall see. Here's the pic of the one I decided wasn't quite good enough.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272809#272809
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/elbow_296.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
From: IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 14, 2009
Subject: Primer with Bing Carburetor
Hey Guys & Gals: Has anyone put a primer on their Jabiru with a Bing
carburetor?
Lynn Nelsen
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 15, 2009
Quick update on the radiator hose experiment. I got it trimmed and installed,
and it looked like a perfectly smooth 90 degree bend. Ran it on the ground, everything
was great, so a re-cowled it and test flew it.
I was quite surprised. There's a lot going on during takeoff, with vibration from
the engine as well as the rolling tires, so it was only after I was airborne
that I realized the engine was vibrating pretty hard.
I throttled back slowly, and after pulling the throttle back about 1/2 inch the
vibration ceased and the RPMs increaed!
I left it there during climbout, and after reaching a safe altitude I firewalled
it again. Immediate vibration, and drop in EGT on cylinders 2,4,6. In fact,
I was getting higher RPMs with lower fuel flow when it wasn't firewalled.
So, I don't know what to conclude exactly. Throttled back 1/2-3/4" the engine
runs smooth as silk now that I've balanced the prop. The EGTs all line up within
about 30 degrees of each other. But the closer to firewalled it gets the
worse it runs.
At this point, I can conclude that the full throttle problem is not related to
the swirl from the SCAT tubing. That's not to say it isn't related to the 90
degree bend that close to the carburetor, but it seems unlikely. The problem
is actually worse now, since the engine didn't run this rough with the SCAT tubing.
Not sure what to try next, but I'll make a posting if I have a breakthrough.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272988#272988
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
Date: Nov 16, 2009
From: "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Bill, this is the same as my Esqual though when loaded (lower RPM on
roll and climb out) it's not so noticeable it seems to come in as rpm
increases.
Something on my to do list when I get the 'other issues' sorted.
Since I last flew the plane (January 09), I've fitted a smooth bend (GM
engined Vectra from breakers yard) though I didn't expect it to fix
this, just something that has been an improvement for others..
I was more thinking it was about the mixture when off the needle jet and
onto the main jet.
So, thanks for update, I await your next bulletin with interest.
Regards, Clive
Esqual in UK (+ Jab SP)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Strahan
Sent: 16 November 2009 02:21
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
Quick update on the radiator hose experiment. I got it trimmed and
installed, and it looked like a perfectly smooth 90 degree bend. Ran it
on the ground, everything was great, so a re-cowled it and test flew it.
I was quite surprised. There's a lot going on during takeoff, with
vibration from the engine as well as the rolling tires, so it was only
after I was airborne that I realized the engine was vibrating pretty
hard.
I throttled back slowly, and after pulling the throttle back about 1/2
inch the vibration ceased and the RPMs increaed!
I left it there during climbout, and after reaching a safe altitude I
firewalled it again. Immediate vibration, and drop in EGT on cylinders
2,4,6. In fact, I was getting higher RPMs with lower fuel flow when it
wasn't firewalled.
So, I don't know what to conclude exactly. Throttled back 1/2-3/4" the
engine runs smooth as silk now that I've balanced the prop. The EGTs
all line up within about 30 degrees of each other. But the closer to
firewalled it gets the worse it runs.
At this point, I can conclude that the full throttle problem is not
related to the swirl from the SCAT tubing. That's not to say it isn't
related to the 90 degree bend that close to the carburetor, but it seems
unlikely. The problem is actually worse now, since the engine didn't
run this rough with the SCAT tubing.
Not sure what to try next, but I'll make a posting if I have a
breakthrough.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=272988#272988
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 16, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Contributions Down By 21%...
Dear Listers,
As of today, contributions to the Matronics List Fund Raiser are lagging behind
last year at this time by 21%. I have a fund raiser each year simply to cover
my operating costs for the Lists. I *do not* accept any advertising income
to support the Lists and rely solely on the contributions of members to keep the
expenses paid.
I run all of my own servers and they are housed here locally, and the Internet
connection is a commercial-grade, T1 connection with public address space. I
also maintain a full backup system that does nightly backups of all List-related
data so that in the event of a server crash or worse, all of the Lists and
the many years of List archive data could be restored onto a new server in a matter
of hours.
All of this costs a fair amount of money, not to mention a significant amount of
my personal time as well. I have a Fund Raiser each year to cover these costs
and I ask that members that feel they receive a benefit from my investments,
make a modest contribution each year to support the continued operation and
upgrade of these services.
If you enjoy the Lists, please make a contribution today. I also offer some incentive
gifts for larger contribution levels. At the Contribution Web Wite, you
can use a credit card, Paypal, or personal check to show your support for the
continuation of these services:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you for your support!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Primer with Bing Carburetor
From: "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au>
Date: Nov 16, 2009
No, but I'm wondering why you would want to? My thought is that it would not do
anything for you that the choke wouldn't do so what am I missing
--------
Cheers, Selwyn
Kit 66
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273229#273229
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: New kid on the blog
Date: Nov 16, 2009
From: n5pb(at)AOL.COM
Welcome to the group. I'm sure you'll love the building of your Lightning
. My kit was No. 74. I just finished my 1st annual condition inspection
...Seems hard to believe it's already been a year. alot of fun flying it.
Good luck and keep us posted...
N82PB
"Bear"
Clearwater, Florida.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gerd + Uli Nowack <NowackLinden(at)gmx.de>
Sent: Fri, Nov 13, 2009 5:42 am
Subject: Lightning-List: New kid on the blog
de>
Another Lightning took to the skies on wednesday 11, taking off at Chicago
O`Hare airport to fly nonstop all the way to Frankfurt Rhein Main A/P.
Not on its own wings, though, but in a crate aboard a MD11 Freighter of Lu
fthansa Cargo. It arrived safely , sits now in front of my garage in Linde
n near Giessen and waits to be assembled in the spare time I can find in
the months( or years) to come.
My name is Gerd (pronounced Garret) Nowack , age 54 and I have been an act
ive pilot, private and professional, since 1976.
So here are my greetings from Germany as a new member of the Lightning lis
t!
Gerd
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
========================
============
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Primer with Bing Carburetor
Date: Nov 17, 2009
From: "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
On a list in another place the primer has been mentioned as being used
successfully. I suggest you surf jabiruengines at Yahoo groups.
The way I see it the advantage of the primer is that one can add the
amount of fuel to richen the start to meet the conditions, whereas the
'starting carburettor' is fixed in it's operation from a day to day
basis.
I have successfully started a dead Jabiru by squirting fuel through the
carburettor simulating a primer when everything else had checked out and
the engine refused to start. This was middle of UK winter when overnight
temps had been around 2 degrees C.
This winter as soon as the 'hard to start days' arrive I shall be
experimenting with enlarging the whole in the starting carburettor
restrictor. To date whenever I've had problems starting my 2200 Jabiru I
feel the mixture wasn't rich enough.
My 3300 Jabiru starts in all conditions I've yet to try it in even
turning over very slowly, different age engine by about 8 years.
If the enlarging of the starting carb restriction doesn't work I'm
seriously considering a primer.
Like a number of issues associated with Jabiru engines, there's engines
and there's engines.......
If I were building again I think I'd add the primer option from the
start.
Regards, Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of selwyn
Sent: 17 November 2009 02:15
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Primer with Bing Carburetor
-->
No, but I'm wondering why you would want to? My thought is that it
would not do anything for you that the choke wouldn't do so what am I
missing
--------
Cheers, Selwyn
Kit 66
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273229#273229
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: What's My Contribution Used For?
Dear Listers,
Some have asked, "What's my Contribution used for?" and that's a good question.
Here are just a few examples of what your direct List support enables. It provides
for the very expensive, commercial-grade T1 Internet connection used on
the List insuring maximum performance and minimal contention when accessing List
services. It pays for the regular system hardware and software upgrades enabling
the highest performance possible for services such as the Archive Search
Engine, List Browser, and Forums. It pays for narly 20 years (yeah, I really
said *20* years) worth of online archive data available for instant random search
and access. And, it offsets the many hours spent writing, developing, and
maintaining the custom applications that power this List Service such as the List
Browse, Search Engine, Forums, and Wiki.
But most importantly, your List Contribution enables a forum where you and your
peers can communicate freely in an environment that is free from moderation,
censorship, advertising, commercialism, SPAM, and computer viruses. How many places
on the Internet can you make all those statements these days?
It is YOUR CONTRIBUTION that directly enables these many aspects of these valuable
List services. Please support it today with your List Contribution. Its one
of the best investments you can make in your Sport...
List Contribution Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you for your support!
Matt Dralle
Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2009
From: Gerd + Uli Nowack <NowackLinden(at)gmx.de>
Subject: Re: New kid on the blog
Hi Bear,
thank you for the friendly welcome!
I just finished the first cutouts from chapter 1/ fuselage prep. and
while looking forward to the building I some how wish, I`d already be
flying like you!
Gerd
> Welcome to the group. I'm sure you'll love the building of your
> Lightning. My kit was No. 74. I just finished my 1st annual
> condition inspection...Seems hard to believe it's already been a
> year. alot of fun flying it.
>
> Good luck and keep us posted...
> N82PB
>
> "Bear"
> Clearwater, Florida.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gerd + Uli Nowack <NowackLinden(at)gmx.de>
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Fri, Nov 13, 2009 5:42 am
> Subject: Lightning-List: New kid on the blog
>
> >
>
> Another Lightning took to the skies on wednesday 11, taking off at
> Chicago O`Hare airport to fly nonstop all the way to Frankfurt Rhein
> Main A/P.
> Not on its own wings, though, but in a crate aboard a MD11 Freighter
> of Lufthansa Cargo. It arrived safely , sits now in front of my garage
> in Linden near Giessen and waits to be assembled in the spare time I
> can find in the months( or years) to come.
> My name is Gerd (pronounced Garret) Nowack , age 54 and I have been an
> active pilot, private and professional, since 1976.
> So here are my greetings from Germany as a new member of the Lightning
> list!
>
> Gerd
>
> ====================================
> ank>www.aeroelectric.com
> target=_blank>www.buildersbooks.com
> blank>www.homebuilthelp.com
> lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ====================================
> target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
> ====================================
> ://forums.matronics.com
> ====================================
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: New kid on the blog
Date: Nov 18, 2009
From: "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
It's great to see the Lightning has arrived in Europe Gerd. I do wonder
if it's time for a few more LSA type aircraft to come the other way (US
to Europe)
The Europeans and producing a lot of different types in the class and
the good thing is from what I've seen there is no speed restriction.
What we do need over here is a harmonised LSA type category but the EASA
(European CAA) are making a right pigs breakfast of everything they get
involved with so for now it's just countries with 'experimental'
available that can build planes like the lightning.
Regards, Clive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gerd +
Uli Nowack
Sent: 18 November 2009 11:48
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: New kid on the blog
Hi Bear,
thank you for the friendly welcome!
I just finished the first cutouts from chapter 1/ fuselage prep. and
while looking forward to the building I some how wish, I`d already be
flying like you!
Gerd
Welcome to the group. I'm sure you'll love the building of your
Lightning. My kit was No. 74. I just finished my 1st annual condition
inspection...Seems hard to believe it's already been a year. alot of
fun flying it.
Good luck and keep us posted...
N82PB
"Bear"
Clearwater, Florida.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gerd + Uli Nowack <NowackLinden(at)gmx.de>
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Fri, Nov 13, 2009 5:42 am
Subject: Lightning-List: New kid on the blog
Another Lightning took to the skies on wednesday 11, taking off
at Chicago O`Hare airport to fly nonstop all the way to Frankfurt Rhein
Main A/P.
Not on its own wings, though, but in a crate aboard a MD11
Freighter of Lufthansa Cargo. It arrived safely , sits now in front of
my garage in Linden near Giessen and waits to be assembled in the spare
time I can find in the months( or years) to come.
My name is Gerd (pronounced Garret) Nowack , age 54 and I have
been an active pilot, private and professional, since 1976.
So here are my greetings from Germany as a new member of the
Lightning list!
Gerd
====================================
ank>www.aeroelectric.com
target=_blank>www.buildersbooks.com
blank>www.homebuilthelp.com
lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
====================================
target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
====================================
://forums.matronics.com
====================================
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/co
ntribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 18, 2009
From: Gerd + Uli Nowack <NowackLinden(at)gmx.de>
Subject: Re: New kid on the blog
Hi James
Yes, the Lightning has made it to Europe, so after the initial
Evaluation by the OUV(the german EAA) for my project is completed (
which should be thae case within the next few days. I hope)
Aircraft builders from other european countries can make use of this for
their certification process.
I`ve given up waiting for a European LSA solution and decided to go
ahead now, since I have a PPL and a medical .
No speed limit for my Lightning!
Gerd
>
> It's great to see the Lightning has arrived in Europe Gerd. I do wonder
> if it's time for a few more LSA type aircraft to come the other way (US
> to Europe)
> The Europeans and producing a lot of different types in the class and
> the good thing is from what I've seen there is no speed restriction.
> What we do need over here is a harmonised LSA type category but the EASA
> (European CAA) are making a right pigs breakfast of everything they get
> involved with so for now it's just countries with 'experimental'
> available that can build planes like the lightning.
>
> Regards, Clive
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gerd +
> Uli Nowack
> Sent: 18 November 2009 11:48
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Lightning-List: New kid on the blog
>
> Hi Bear,
>
> thank you for the friendly welcome!
> I just finished the first cutouts from chapter 1/ fuselage prep. and
> while looking forward to the building I some how wish, I`d already be
> flying like you!
>
> Gerd
>
>
>
> Welcome to the group. I'm sure you'll love the building of your
> Lightning. My kit was No. 74. I just finished my 1st annual condition
> inspection...Seems hard to believe it's already been a year. alot of
> fun flying it.
>
> Good luck and keep us posted...
> N82PB
>
> "Bear"
> Clearwater, Florida.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gerd + Uli Nowack <NowackLinden(at)gmx.de>
>
> To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Fri, Nov 13, 2009 5:42 am
> Subject: Lightning-List: New kid on the blog
>
>
>
>
> Another Lightning took to the skies on wednesday 11, taking off
> at Chicago O`Hare airport to fly nonstop all the way to Frankfurt Rhein
> Main A/P.
> Not on its own wings, though, but in a crate aboard a MD11
> Freighter of Lufthansa Cargo. It arrived safely , sits now in front of
> my garage in Linden near Giessen and waits to be assembled in the spare
> time I can find in the months( or years) to come.
> My name is Gerd (pronounced Garret) Nowack , age 54 and I have
> been an active pilot, private and professional, since 1976.
> So here are my greetings from Germany as a new member of the
> Lightning list!
>
> Gerd
>
> ====================================
> ank>www.aeroelectric.com
> target=_blank>www.buildersbooks.com
> blank>www.homebuilthelp.com
> lank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ====================================
> target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
> ====================================
> ://forums.matronics.com
> ====================================
>
>
>
>
>
> href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
> href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
> href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/co
> ntribution
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matr
> onics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Slight ringing at low RPM when taxiing
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 18, 2009
I hear the very slightest ringing sound when taxiing. It does not occur at idle
RPM, and can only be heard for a brief moment as the RPMs come up from idle
to sufficient RPM to start to taxi.
It is very brief, and very quiet, but it's there. Just the tiniest ringing sound.
And it seems to change in frequency with the engine during the short time
it can be heard.
I don't hear anything of the sort on takeoff or in flight.
Any ideas?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273559#273559
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 18, 2009
Well, after experimenting quite a bit and flying a couple of hours in different
configurations, here's my latest conclusion on my uneven fuel distribution:
I've ordered a Rotec TBI. :)
My flight with just the radiator hoes was awful.
After some more research, I tried modifying it with an .025 aluminum insert along
the 90 degree bend to stop any rotation and to help it around the corner.
That produced results better than the original SCAT tube but still very uneven.
Then I inserted another short piece of aluminum at 90 degrees to the first to hopefully
kill any rotation and get everything lined up before the carb.
Results: Even better, slightly, but still not acceptable.
I have essentially tried 4 different tube configurations to get the air from the
filter box to the carb, and while I have produced varied results, I have not
addressed the original problem to my satisfaction.
I spoke with the tech guy at Rotec, who said they had experienced similar problems
with the Bing, and while it was a great carb it was very sensitive to slight
imbalances and swirl in the flow. And he assured me their TBI was much less
sensitive to those issues.
I'll post under a new thread when I receive and install the Rotec unit. Fingers
are crossed.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273561#273561
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
Date: Nov 18, 2009
Bill,
Sounds like a good tech article on the TBI for the news letter too. I have
drilled 2 more holes in the static tube, the first 1" back from the original
on the opposite side and another 2" rear of the original on the same side.
My TAs and Avg ground speed are now right on. I think Tex was on to
something and the change to your static tube seems to be the same adjustment
N327AL needed. I will try on one of our other Lightnings as this may have to
be added to the build manual.
Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Strahan
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 12:24 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Uneven EGTs at full throttle
Well, after experimenting quite a bit and flying a couple of hours in
different configurations, here's my latest conclusion on my uneven fuel
distribution: I've ordered a Rotec TBI. :)
My flight with just the radiator hoes was awful.
After some more research, I tried modifying it with an .025 aluminum insert
along the 90 degree bend to stop any rotation and to help it around the
corner. That produced results better than the original SCAT tube but still
very uneven.
Then I inserted another short piece of aluminum at 90 degrees to the first
to hopefully kill any rotation and get everything lined up before the carb.
Results: Even better, slightly, but still not acceptable.
I have essentially tried 4 different tube configurations to get the air from
the filter box to the carb, and while I have produced varied results, I have
not addressed the original problem to my satisfaction.
I spoke with the tech guy at Rotec, who said they had experienced similar
problems with the Bing, and while it was a great carb it was very sensitive
to slight imbalances and swirl in the flow. And he assured me their TBI was
much less sensitive to those issues.
I'll post under a new thread when I receive and install the Rotec unit.
Fingers are crossed.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273561#273561
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: uneven EGT's
Date: Nov 18, 2009
Nick, I also had a uneven egt on number one (1) . I rotated the carb
about three degrees and problem gone. I use the normal scat tub between
the air box and carb. All EGT's are now within 45 degrees. Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "JOSEPH MATHIAS LINDA MATHIAS" <lbmathias(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: uneven EGT's
Date: Nov 18, 2009
Tex,
You were lucky; rotating the carb made very little difference on my
EGTs.
Linda
----- Original Message -----
From: Tex Mantell
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 6:48 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: uneven EGT's
Nick, I also had a uneven egt on number one (1) . I rotated the carb
about three degrees and problem gone. I use the normal scat tub between
the air box and carb. All EGT's are now within 45 degrees. Tex
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Nov 18, 2009
Subject: Re: Slight ringing at low RPM when taxiing
Bill,
Unless you have the "door bell" mod, I suspect you have something
vibrating. Check anywhere you have air movement under the cowling for
something loose that could vibrate. That is assuming the sound is coming from
under the cowl. Maybe the first question should be where does it sound like it
is coming from.
As to your Bing carb issue, the fixes you have tried (smooth radiator
hose and slightly rotating the carb) has fixed the other airplanes I have
heard having the uneven EGT issues (Lightnings and Zodiacs) so I am thinking
it is something specific to your carb or intake manifold. Have you
checked to make sure you don't have some sort of induction leak? It wouldn't
take much of an air leak to cause some major issues with fuel distribution.
But if you do try the Rotec TBI, we do need a future article in the
newsletter like Nick mentioned. Several folks have tried them with the
Jabiru engine, but I am not aware of any on 3300s and certainly none on a
Lightning yet. I talked to Nick, Pete, and Ben about testing one while I was
out
there in October and they seemed to be open to Ben trying one out when he
found the time. I am guessing he has not found any free time recently. So
it would be good to hear your results when you get that done. Since the
TBI had a mixture, you could pull off your HACman and "give" it to me. What
a great idea.
Blue Skies,
Buz
In a message dated 11/18/2009 1:19:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Bill Strahan"
I hear the very slightest ringing sound when taxiing. It does not occur
at idle RPM, and can only be heard for a brief moment as the RPMs come up
from idle to sufficient RPM to start to taxi.
It is very brief, and very quiet, but it's there. Just the tiniest
ringing sound. And it seems to change in frequency with the engine during the
short time it can be heard.
I don't hear anything of the sort on takeoff or in flight.
Any ideas?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273559#273559
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Slight ringing at low RPM when taxiing
Date: Nov 19, 2009
From: "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
The exhaust springs can resonate and will actually snap, I always put a
loop of locking wire through them, partly to stop them dropping on
anyone's head if they snap and partly to stop the vibration that makes
them snap. Might be a singing spring?
Regards, Clive
-----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: 19 November 2009 04:48
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Slight ringing at low RPM when taxiing
Bill,
Unless you have the "door bell" mod, I suspect you have something
vibrating. Check anywhere you have air movement under the cowling for
something loose that could vibrate. That is assuming the sound is
coming from under the cowl. Maybe the first question should be where
does it sound like it is coming from.
As to your Bing carb issue, the fixes you have tried (smooth
radiator hose and slightly rotating the carb) has fixed the other
airplanes I have heard having the uneven EGT issues (Lightnings and
Zodiacs) so I am thinking it is something specific to your carb or
intake manifold. Have you checked to make sure you don't have some sort
of induction leak? It wouldn't take much of an air leak to cause some
major issues with fuel distribution.
But if you do try the Rotec TBI, we do need a future article in the
newsletter like Nick mentioned. Several folks have tried them with the
Jabiru engine, but I am not aware of any on 3300s and certainly none on
a Lightning yet. I talked to Nick, Pete, and Ben about testing one
while I was out there in October and they seemed to be open to Ben
trying one out when he found the time. I am guessing he has not found
any free time recently. So it would be good to hear your results when
you get that done. Since the TBI had a mixture, you could pull off your
HACman and "give" it to me. What a great idea.
Blue Skies,
Buz
In a message dated 11/18/2009 1:19:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
I hear the very slightest ringing sound when taxiing. It does
not occur at idle RPM, and can only be heard for a brief moment as the
RPMs come up from idle to sufficient RPM to start to taxi.
It is very brief, and very quiet, but it's there. Just the
tiniest ringing sound. And it seems to change in frequency with the
engine during the short time it can be heard.
I don't hear anything of the sort on takeoff or in flight.
Any ideas?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273559#273559==============
===============================
_nbsp; (And Get Some AWESOME FREE to find Gifts tric re
b k you for p; -Matt Dralle, List
======================== Use the ties Day
================================================ -
MATRONICS WEB FORUMS =================================================
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Slight ringing at low RPM when taxiing
From: "selwyn" <selwyn(at)ellisworks.com.au>
Date: Nov 19, 2009
Another cure for the vibrating exhaust springs is to run a bead of high temperature
sealant along the spring, damps out the vibration and, so far, seems to stop
them self destructing.
--------
Cheers, Selwyn
Kit 66
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273690#273690
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: uneven EGT's
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 19, 2009
Is this at full throttle? Mine is excellent once throttled back quite a bit, all
within about 30 degrees of each other, which I consider about as good as you
can get with a carb.
It's only at the upper end of the throttle setting, full throttle in particular
that mine get incredibly uneven.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273759#273759
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Slight ringing at low RPM when taxiing
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 19, 2009
I gave the engine a thorough going over last time I had the cowl off, which lately
has been almost every day I fly. I'm trying different things with the carb,
then going to fly. I may be the first to wear out my cowling nutplates...:)
I'll check all the things mentioned and in particular the springs on the exhaust.
That almost seems the most likely since it sounds like it's coming from
somewhat low on the engine.
Buz, if the Rotec works to my satisfaction the Hacman is yours. See, it never
does hurt to ask.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273762#273762
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: uneven EGT's
Date: Nov 19, 2009
I have been playing arround with different jets and needle jets and have
come back to the original jets that were in the engine to start. At full
throtle take off and climb they are in the 1150 to 1250 region and not very
close to each other. At cruse arround 2450 to 3000 rpm they are all arround
1275 to 1325. I have a 250 main jet and a 290 needle jet. I only have 28
hrs on the plane and mabe its getting broken in. I will stay at this set up
till I get a few more hours on it. Tex
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 3:48 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: uneven EGT's
>
> Is this at full throttle? Mine is excellent once throttled back quite a
> bit, all within about 30 degrees of each other, which I consider about as
> good as you can get with a carb.
>
> It's only at the upper end of the throttle setting, full throttle in
> particular that mine get incredibly uneven.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273759#273759
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 19, 2009
From: Allan Maxwell <allanmaxe(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Slight ringing at low RPM when taxiing
Hi Buzz this is Allan Maxwell asking if you got the other email I sent let
me know.AllanMaxwell
--- On Wed, 11/18/09, N1BZRich(at)aol.com wrote:
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com <N1BZRich(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Slight ringing at low RPM when taxiing
Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 10:48 PM
Bill,
----Unless you have the "door bell" mod, I suspect you have somethi
ng vibrating.- Check anywhere you have air movement under the cowling for
something loose that could vibrate.- That is assuming the sound is comin
g from under the cowl.- Maybe the first question should be where does it
sound like it is coming from.
----As to-your Bing carb issue, the fixes you have tried (smooth
radiator hose and slightly rotating the carb)-has fixed the other airplan
es I have heard having the uneven EGT issues (Lightnings and Zodiacs) so I
am thinking it is something specific to your carb or intake manifold.- Ha
ve you checked to make sure you don't have some sort of induction leak?-
It wouldn't take much of an air leak to cause some major issues with fuel d
istribution.-
----But if you do try the Rotec TBI, we do need a future article in
the newsletter like Nick mentioned.- Several folks have tried them with
the Jabiru engine, but I am not aware of any on 3300s and certainly none on
a Lightning yet.- I talked to Nick, Pete, and Ben about testing one whil
e I was out there in October and they seemed to be open to Ben trying one o
ut when he found the time.- I am guessing he has not found any free time
recently.- So it would be good to hear your results when you get that don
e.- Since the TBI had a mixture, you could pull off your HACman and "give
" it to me.- What a great idea.
Blue Skies,
Buz
-
-
-
In a message dated 11/18/2009 1:19:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, bill@gdsx
.com writes:
I hear the very slightest ringing sound when taxiing.- It does not occur
at idle RPM, and can only be heard for a brief moment as the RPMs come up f
rom idle to sufficient RPM to start to taxi.
It is very brief, and very quiet, but it's there.- Just the tiniest ringi
ng sound.- And it seems to change in frequency with the engine during the
short time it can be heard.
I don't hear anything of the sort on takeoff or in flight.
Any ideas?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=273559#273559=====
================
_nbsp; - - - -- (And Get Some AWESOME FREE to find Gifts tric re
b k you for p; - - - - - - - - - - -Matt Dralle, List
======================== Us
e the ties Day ====================
=== - - - - - -- - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS =====
===================
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 19, 2009
From: Allan Maxwell <allanmaxe(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: uneven EGT's
Linda I have been working on my egt's I have an esqual. This is the first d
ay to fly since changes. My egt's are much better in cruise up to 3000. The
fix was to replace the O rings in the manifold. I will take the gasket sea
ler 2b tomorrow to seal the cracks and around the intake tubes. My plane ha
s 302 hrs flying now hope the info will help will let you know the results.
Allan Maxwell
--- On Wed, 11/18/09, JOSEPH MATHIAS LINDA MATHIAS
wrote:
From: JOSEPH MATHIAS LINDA MATHIAS <lbmathias(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: uneven EGT's
Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 7:22 PM
Tex,
--- You were lucky; rotating the carb made very little difference on
my EGTs.
-
Linda
----- Original Message -----
From: Tex Mantell
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 6:48 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: uneven EGT's
Nick, I also had a uneven egt on number one (1) . I rotated the carb about
three degrees and problem gone. I use the normal scat tub between the air b
ox and carb. All EGT's are now within 45 degrees.-- Tex
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chr
ef="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matroni
cs.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 20, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Just A Few Days Left; Still Trailing Last Year...
Dear Listers,
There are just a few more days left of this year's List Fund Raiser! Response
has been very good, but still well behind last year. If you've been waiting until
the last minute to make your contribution and maybe even pick up a great
gift, now might be good time to show your support!
Please remember that there isn't any sort of commercial advertising on the Lists
and the *only* means of keeping these Lists running is through your Contributions
during this Fund Raiser.
Please make a Contribution today!
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 22, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Make Sure You're Listed! List of Contributors Published
in December!
Dear Listers,
The List of Contributors (LOC) is just around the corner! In December I post a
list of everyone that so generously made a Contribution to support the Lists.
Its my way of publicly thanking everyone that took a minute to show their appreciation
for the Lists.
Won't you take minute and assure that your name is on the upcoming LOC? Tell others
that you appreciate the Lists. Making a Contribution to support the Lists
is fast and easy using your Visa, MasterCard, or Paypal account:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Or, by dropping a personal check in the mail to:
Matronics / Matt Dralle
PO Box 347
Livermore CA 94551-0347
USA
(Please include your email address on the check!)
I would like to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution thus
far during this year's List Fund Raiser! Remember that its YOUR support that keeps
these Lists running and improving! Don't forget to include a little comment
about how the Lists have helped you!
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 24, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Just A Few More Days To Make Your List Contribution...
There is less than a week left in this year's List Fund Raiser and only a few short
days to grab one of the great Contribution Gifts available this year. Support
is still significantly lagging behind last year at this point but hopefully
it will pick up here towards the end. Please remember that it is solely the
Contributions of List members that keeps the Lists up and running as there
is no commercialism or advertising on the Matronics Lists and Forums.
The List Contribution web site is secure, fast, and easy and you can use a credit
card, Paypal, or a personal check:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
I want to thank everyone that has already made a generous contribution to support
the Lists!
Thank you!
Matt Dralle
Matronics EMail List and Forum Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Wear point worth checking
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 24, 2009
I noticed recently that the braided lines going to my oil cooler were very close
to one of the pushrod tubes on the rearmost cylinder. I made a note to check
that next time the bottom cowl was off, and in doing so yesterday I was shocked
to see that they had clearly been vibrating against the tube.
The wear was not only visible, but could easily be felt with my fingers. I don't
know the thickness of those tubes, but I'd estimate the worn depression was
a few thousandths deep.
The lines are now secured from vibration. I know each plane is different, but
since these lines are routed similarly on all the planes it's worth making a note
and checking next time you have access to the engine.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=274653#274653
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 25, 2009
From: Allan Maxwell <allanmaxe(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: uneven EGT's
Hi linda just wanted to give and up date to high egt's I changed the o ring
s on the manifold and rotated the carb slightly to the right looking from t
he tail forward of the plane. I had egt's- wireing problems must change a
fter 4 years . I will change the carb jets in a couple of- days will let
you know Allan Maxwell
--- On Wed, 11/18/09, JOSEPH MATHIAS LINDA MATHIAS
wrote:
From: JOSEPH MATHIAS LINDA MATHIAS <lbmathias(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: uneven EGT's
Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2009, 7:22 PM
Tex,
--- You were lucky; rotating the carb made very little difference on
my EGTs.
-
Linda
----- Original Message -----
From: Tex Mantell
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 6:48 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: uneven EGT's
Nick, I also had a uneven egt on number one (1) . I rotated the carb about
three degrees and problem gone. I use the normal scat tub between the air b
ox and carb. All EGT's are now within 45 degrees.-- Tex
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chr
ef="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matroni
cs.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
=0A=0A=0A
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: High indicated fuel flow with fuel pump on
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Nov 25, 2009
I've been fleshing out my checklist and recently decided to add turning the fuel
pump on for takeoff and landing. I'm used to that with my Grumman, and it felt
natural to do it that way.
Today I took off using the new checklist, and once I was a few miles from the airport
I noticed my fuel flow was 11GPH! I've never seen anything near that high
and my fuel flow already was reading about 10% too high.
I throttled back to a setting that typically shows 4.5-5 gph and was seeing 7.
For a moment, I pictured a fuel leak and decided to turn the boost pump on and
see if the fuel flow surged, which would confirm a leak on the firewall side,
and I was going to immediately return to the airport.
Instead I realized I had left the boost pump on since takeoff and then I wondered
if that was the cause of the high reading. Sure enough, with the boost pump
off the EIS indicated 5.1 gph. Boost pump on and it jumped back to 7 or so.
I was pretty sure I didn't have a fuel leak at that point, so left the pump on
for a half hour or so while I flew. I saw a growing disparity between what the
totalizer thought I had left and what the tanks were indicating, confirming
to me that the indication is all that was changing, I wasn't pumping fuel overboard.
So, anyone else noticed the same thing? I would have thought the flow sensor would
have been independent of fuel pressure, but that appears to not be the case.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=274827#274827
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 26, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: What Are You Thankful For...?
Dear Listers,
Here in the United States, Thursday is our National day of Thanksgiving. Many
of us will be traveling to be with our families and friends to share in generous
feasts of plenty and giving thanks for many blessings that have been bestowed
upon us.
Many Listers have expressed over the last couple of weeks how thankful they are
for the Email Lists and Forums here on the Matronics servers and for all of the
assistance and comradery they have experienced being a part of the Lists.
One of my favorite comments is when someone writes to me and says something like,
"Its the first thing I do in the morning while I'm having my morning coffee!".
That's a wonderful tribute to the purpose and function of these Lists.
Its always great to hear I'm not the only one that jumps out of bed each morning
to check my List email!!
Won't you take a minute today and show your appreciation for these Lists and for
their continued operation and upgrade?
The List Contribution Site is:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you in advance for your kind consideration,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: High indicated fuel flow with fuel pump on
Date: Nov 26, 2009
From: "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
The fuel flow meter picks up the pulse of pressure from the pump which
you've no doubt gathered.
This is what I've seen on several jabs with fuel flow meters, yet
another application where knowing too much causes questions that the old
simple applications wouldn't have brought up!
I did wonder if there was a sensor that wouldn't do this, maybe an
ultrasonic one but I imagine those are either not made yet or too
expensive.
CJ
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Strahan
Sent: 26 November 2009 02:06
Subject: Lightning-List: High indicated fuel flow with fuel pump on
I've been fleshing out my checklist and recently decided to add turning
the fuel pump on for takeoff and landing. I'm used to that with my
Grumman, and it felt natural to do it that way.
Today I took off using the new checklist, and once I was a few miles
from the airport I noticed my fuel flow was 11GPH! I've never seen
anything near that high and my fuel flow already was reading about 10%
too high.
I throttled back to a setting that typically shows 4.5-5 gph and was
seeing 7. For a moment, I pictured a fuel leak and decided to turn the
boost pump on and see if the fuel flow surged, which would confirm a
leak on the firewall side, and I was going to immediately return to the
airport.
Instead I realized I had left the boost pump on since takeoff and then I
wondered if that was the cause of the high reading. Sure enough, with
the boost pump off the EIS indicated 5.1 gph. Boost pump on and it
jumped back to 7 or so.
I was pretty sure I didn't have a fuel leak at that point, so left the
pump on for a half hour or so while I flew. I saw a growing disparity
between what the totalizer thought I had left and what the tanks were
indicating, confirming to me that the indication is all that was
changing, I wasn't pumping fuel overboard.
So, anyone else noticed the same thing? I would have thought the flow
sensor would have been independent of fuel pressure, but that appears to
not be the case.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=274827#274827
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tex Mantell" <wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net>
Subject: Re: High indicated fuel flow with fuel pump on
Date: Nov 26, 2009
Bill , I have seen bthe same thing and have not figured out what causes it.
There is no leak. Tex
--- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 9:06 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: High indicated fuel flow with fuel pump on
>
> I've been fleshing out my checklist and recently decided to add turning
> the fuel pump on for takeoff and landing. I'm used to that with my
> Grumman, and it felt natural to do it that way.
>
> Today I took off using the new checklist, and once I was a few miles from
> the airport I noticed my fuel flow was 11GPH! I've never seen anything
> near that high and my fuel flow already was reading about 10% too high.
>
> I throttled back to a setting that typically shows 4.5-5 gph and was
> seeing 7. For a moment, I pictured a fuel leak and decided to turn the
> boost pump on and see if the fuel flow surged, which would confirm a leak
> on the firewall side, and I was going to immediately return to the
> airport.
>
> Instead I realized I had left the boost pump on since takeoff and then I
> wondered if that was the cause of the high reading. Sure enough, with the
> boost pump off the EIS indicated 5.1 gph. Boost pump on and it jumped
> back to 7 or so.
>
> I was pretty sure I didn't have a fuel leak at that point, so left the
> pump on for a half hour or so while I flew. I saw a growing disparity
> between what the totalizer thought I had left and what the tanks were
> indicating, confirming to me that the indication is all that was changing,
> I wasn't pumping fuel overboard.
>
> So, anyone else noticed the same thing? I would have thought the flow
> sensor would have been independent of fuel pressure, but that appears to
> not be the case.
>
> Bill
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=274827#274827
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: IFLYSMODEL(at)AOL.COM
Date: Nov 26, 2009
Subject: Re: High indicated fuel flow with fuel pump on
Me Too.
Lynn Nelsen
In a message dated 11/26/2009 7:06:09 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
wb2ssj(at)frontiernet.net writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Tex Mantell"
Bill , I have seen bthe same thing and have not figured out what causes
it.
There is no leak. Tex
--- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 9:06 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: High indicated fuel flow with fuel pump on
> --> Lightning-List message posted by: "Bill Strahan"
>
> I've been fleshing out my checklist and recently decided to add turning
> the fuel pump on for takeoff and landing. I'm used to that with my
> Grumman, and it felt natural to do it that way.
>
> Today I took off using the new checklist, and once I was a few miles
from
> the airport I noticed my fuel flow was 11GPH! I've never seen anything
> near that high and my fuel flow already was reading about 10% too high.
>
> I throttled back to a setting that typically shows 4.5-5 gph and was
> seeing 7. For a moment, I pictured a fuel leak and decided to turn the
> boost pump on and see if the fuel flow surged, which would confirm a
leak
> on the firewall side, and I was going to immediately return to the
> airport.
>
> Instead I realized I had left the boost pump on since takeoff and then I
> wondered if that was the cause of the high reading. Sure enough, with
the
> boost pump off the EIS indicated 5.1 gph. Boost pump on and it jumped
> back to 7 or so.
>
> I was pretty sure I didn't have a fuel leak at that point, so left the
> pump on for a half hour or so while I flew. I saw a growing disparity
> between what the totalizer thought I had left and what the tanks were
> indicating, confirming to me that the indication is all that was
changing,
> I wasn't pumping fuel overboard.
>
> So, anyone else noticed the same thing? I would have thought the flow
> sensor would have been independent of fuel pressure, but that appears to
> not be the case.
>
> Bill
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=274827#274827
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kayberg(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 26, 2009
Subject: Re: High indicated fuel flow with fuel pump on
In a message dated 11/25/2009 9:06:51 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
I've been fleshing out my checklist and recently decided to add turning
the fuel pump on for takeoff and landing. I'm used to that with my Grumman,
and it felt natural to do it that way.
I want to offer an alternitive thought about when to use the electric fuel
pump.
I use the electric to be sure the carb is full before starting. Then I
turn it off.... I turn it back on briefly during runup before takeoff to
insure the engine runs with both on.
My emergency procedures for a loss of power call for 1) electric fuel
pump on 2) switch tanks.
If you lose power on takeoff with both pumps running, you dont know what
went wrong. If the power is restored with the electric pump on, it is
likely the mechanical one failed. If it failed it could be pumping fuel out
somewhere and you will want to land immediatly.
If you happened to run a tank dry or had it unport because of low fuel in a
down wing, you will want to be sure the pump is on, so just assuming it
was on for takeoff ( notice how often we forget to turn it on?) may not be
the best. Hence, always: Hit electric pump switch and switch tanks. It
takes about a 5 count for the engine to pick up on an empty tank switch.
Dont ask me how I know!
Switching tanks is a must because the fuel filter could have clogged on the
one being fed...or the fuel guages are wrong. Of course if the other
tank is dry or too low to reliably feed, shame on you!! I would suggest you
never take off with either tank that is too low to feed on a takeoff.
Just my thoughts on use of the boost pump.
Now, The Facet pump has a built in check valve. I suspect the engine
driven pump has a higher pressure than the Facet we commonly use. When the
facet is on, the check valve is fluttering. I suspect the higher presure
from the engine driven is pushing some fuel past the check valve. Even a
very little bit will show up on the fuel flow.
FWIW
Doug Koenigsberg
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Nov 27, 2009
Subject: Re: High indicated fuel flow with fuel pump on
Bill and all,
Sorry for taking so long to respond to this question, but with the
turkey day holiday and finalizing the December newsletter (should go to Pete
and Jim today), I have kept busy. Anyway, I also have seen the same
increase in fuel flow when the electric fuel pump is on. I have always just
assumed it was because the fuel flow transducer (like the fuel pressure sensor)
was between the electric fuel pump and the engine driven fuel pump and not
between the engine driven fuel pump and the carb. So I think it is
probably normal to see a rise in fuel flow (as you see the fuel pressure go up
-
if you have the fuel pressure indicator) when you turn the electric fuel
pump on.
Buz
In a message dated 11/25/2009 9:06:51 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Bill Strahan"
I've been fleshing out my checklist and recently decided to add turning
the fuel pump on for takeoff and landing. I'm used to that with my Grumman,
and it felt natural to do it that way.
Today I took off using the new checklist, and once I was a few miles from
the airport I noticed my fuel flow was 11GPH! I've never seen anything
near that high and my fuel flow already was reading about 10% too high.
I throttled back to a setting that typically shows 4.5-5 gph and was
seeing 7. For a moment, I pictured a fuel leak and decided to turn the boost
pump on and see if the fuel flow surged, which would confirm a leak on the
firewall side, and I was going to immediately return to the airport.
Instead I realized I had left the boost pump on since takeoff and then I
wondered if that was the cause of the high reading. Sure enough, with the
boost pump off the EIS indicated 5.1 gph. Boost pump on and it jumped back
to 7 or so.
I was pretty sure I didn't have a fuel leak at that point, so left the
pump on for a half hour or so while I flew. I saw a growing disparity between
what the totalizer thought I had left and what the tanks were indicating,
confirming to me that the indication is all that was changing, I wasn't
pumping fuel overboard.
So, anyone else noticed the same thing? I would have thought the flow
sensor would have been independent of fuel pressure, but that appears to not
be the case.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=274827#274827
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 28, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: No "Black Friday" For List Fund Raiser...
Even though the number of List subscriptions and List posts are up significantly
this year compared to last year, support during this year's List Fund Raiser
has been woefully lagging from last year. There are only a couple more days
left in November and the end of the Fund Raiser is quickly approaching.
I have always preferred a non-commercial List experience as many, many members
have also expressed that they do as well. However, if the yearly fund raiser
cannot generate sufficient funds to keep the bills paid on the List service expenses,
I will have to look into some sort of advertising. Please don't let that
happen!
Your personal contribution of $20 or $30 goes a long ways to keeping the operation
a float. The lunch combo at Carl's Jr costs nearly $10 these days. Isn't
the List worth at least as much as a couple of burgers?
Please make sure your name is on this year's List of Contributors published in
December. The Contribution site is secure, quick, and easy:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you in advance for your support!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List and Forum Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 29, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Just Two More Days Left; Fund Raiser Behind By 12%...
Dear Listers,
This year's List Fund Raiser is still trailing last year by a 12% margin. If you
like the ad-free environment that is the Matronics Email List and Forum experience,
please make a quick Contribution to keep it that way!
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
I've been getting a ton of really nice comments from Contributors regarding the
Lists. Please read over some of them below and see if they don't resonate with
you as well.
Thank you in advance for your generous contribution to support these Lists!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
--------------------------- Member Feedback ----------------------------
ur web site is a real institution of the whole Experimental
Aircraft subculture.
John G
Thanks Matt for the lists. A lot of good info. Great bunch
of list members. Great videos and no SPAM.
Paul C
It has been a valuable tool.
Troy M
..appreciate the site as much as ever.
Larry M
By using various forums I've learned a ton, received great
advice, made friends, and saved money!
Craig W
Since I've finished [my project], I've not had much to do as
far as fabrication of electrical systems. However,
selectively reading various topics is still very valuable
and Bob's insights and new how to's make me a continuous
subscriber.
Larry F
Matronics user groups are the best tool I have for learning
to build my RV-10!
Philip W
There is always useful knowledge to be found on this list,
and I suspect that it has kept quite a few people out of
trouble over the years it has been in operation. Good
entertainment, too.
Graham H
Great web site. I wish I'd known about it while building.
Bob S
I'm happy to provide some support to this list. It is very
helpful.
Vaughn T
Good service to sport aviation!!
Roger B
Awesome Service you provide for us!
Bill R
My [project] is almost finished! However, it wouldn't be
close without the [this] group.
Douwe B
Great list.
Robert S
I'm not a builder yet but learning lots from the list.
Peter M
Some nonsense, some humor, but mostly good information.
Tony C
Thanks for creating and keeping the Lists. They are
entertaining and always informative!
John M
Thanks for this valuable resource to our community.
Barry H
The list is IMHO the greatest resource on the net.
John B
Thanks again for providing another year of your useful
List service.
Jerry B
Great site indeed, every time I get a message I usually
learn something.
Peter B
You are making a huge contribution to the builder fraternity
and in no small way enhancing sport aviation safety.
Richard G
The List is the SINGLE, MOST IMPORTANT resource I have in
building my RV10. I would be lost without out it. And I
have made a bunch of new friends as well!
Les K
The lists are one of the things I really enjoy, so keep
up the good work.
Freddie H
Every year -- the best value for my time and money!
Owen B
This list is a major contribution to safe building!
Donald K
Really enjoy the daily boost it gives me.
Walter S
In the last 18 months I have been privileged to listen &
ask. I have learnt at the feet of the masters...
Stewart G
You set the standard on how Internet forums should be run
and managed.
Larry W
The Universe is a better place because of you.
Eric J
[The List] helped me get flying, fly off my test hours and
make my systems better. I continue to get and give
information through these lists.
Ralph C
..another GREAT year of advice, answers, and inspiration
courtesy of the Lists and your hard work!!!!
Rob B
..the best forum on the Internet!
Robert B
I can't tell you how grateful I am for your list and your
subscribers to keep me up to date and holding the dream.
Ashley M
This page makes it easy to contribute.
Jeffrey P
Thank you for your expertise in creating & running the
much useful lists!
Anthony P
Thanks for providing our advertising free on line community.
George R
Thanks for maintaining the equipment and software to
provide this valuable source of information to us
individuals. Your effort is appreciated by many more people
than you realize.
Ross H
Thanks for a great site. Although the project is complete
and flying I still get a wealth of information from all
the messages.
Marcus C
Only learned about you six months ago...my RV-7A is just
finished, but the list has been helpful. Wish I had
discovered you sooner.
Jack B
This is an invaluable communications media for us
common minded folks to exchange technical and other
information.
George H
..great service that you provide.
David W
..still appreciate your list.
Alain L
[The] Lists are an invaluable resource. I know that it has
helped me enormously in my project.
William B
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Nov 30, 2009
From: Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com>
Subject: [Please Read] - Last Official Day of List Fund Raiser!
Dear Listers,
Its November 30th and that means at least two things. For better or worse, its
my 46th birthday! But it also means that its that last official day of the
Matronics Email List Fund Raiser! If you been jones'n over one of the really
nice gifts that are available this year with a qualifying Contribution, then now
is the time to jump on one!!
If you've been meaning to make a Contribution this month but have been putting
it off for some reason, NOW is the time!
I will be posting the List of Contributors in a few days, so you'll probably want
to be known as a person that supported the Lists!
I want to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution so far this
year in support of our Lists. It is your generosity that keeps this operation
a float and I don't ever forget it. Hopefully everyone feels the same.
The List Contribution Web Site is fast and easy. Please support our habit by making
your Contribution right now:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you to all in advance!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: RE: JabiruEngine-List: [Please Read] - Last Official Day
of List Fund Raiser!
Date: Nov 30, 2009
From: "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
Guys, throw Matt a bone will you, I'm trying to put a brave face on life
but hearing about poor old Matt's situation every few hours is bringing
a tear to my eye. It's just not fair.....:-((
Just a few dollars mister...
It is the festive after all.....
Regards, Clive
P.S. get some adverts on the list and make a few quid (dollars)....:-)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-jabiruengine-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-jabiruengine-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Dralle
Sent: 30 November 2009 08:17
Subject: JabiruEngine-List: [Please Read] - Last Official Day of List
Fund Raiser!
--> JabiruEngine-List message posted by: Matt Dralle
-->
Dear Listers,
Its November 30th and that means at least two things. For better or
worse, its my 46th birthday! But it also means that its that last
official day of the Matronics Email List Fund Raiser! If you been
jones'n over one of the really nice gifts that are available this year
with a qualifying Contribution, then now is the time to jump on one!!
If you've been meaning to make a Contribution this month but have been
putting it off for some reason, NOW is the time!
I will be posting the List of Contributors in a few days, so you'll
probably want to be known as a person that supported the Lists!
I want to thank everyone that has so generously made a Contribution so
far this year in support of our Lists. It is your generosity that keeps
this operation a float and I don't ever forget it. Hopefully everyone
feels the same.
The List Contribution Web Site is fast and easy. Please support our
habit by making your Contribution right now:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you to all in advance!
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Nov 30, 2009
Subject: December Lightning Newsletter
All,
The December Lightning Newsletter, Issue 2-12, is currently posted on
the Lightning web site. It should also soon be up on Jim Langley's site as
well. Go to either:
_http://www.flylightning.net/_ (http://www.flylightning.net/)
or
_http://www.jimslightning.com/_ (http://www.jimslightning.com/)
This issue of the Lightning "Hangar Talk" has several features you
should find interesting and entertaining. First in an article by Clive James
covering three European fly-ins that he attended this past summer. Next,
Nick and I worked together to try to cover the new or revised 51% rule, it's
changes, and how it will affect Arion's builder's assist program. The
"factory news" section has a short flight report from Nick on their brand new
demo Lightning and a change they are making to the Lightning nose wheel
assembly. Currently flying Lightings may want to make this change as well.
The "builder's and flyers" section has inputs from several of our readers:
Pete Disher, Jim Hohannes, Steve Hacker, and our first builder from
Germany, Gerd Nowack. You can also see what World Record Earl Ferguson has been
up to in the "reader's feedback" section. (I wonder if he is thinking about
setting a land speed record?) Once again, Pete's Engine Clinic is great
reading as he talks about the Jabiru electrical generating system.
Rounding out this issue are the upcoming events, safety items (more on
X-wind landings), skunk works, tech tips, other items, and final thoughts
(see what Joe Mathias has been up to in this section).
As always, I am requesting any and all feedback. Yea, I know, the
chances of actually getting any feedback is "slim to none", but I'll ask again
just in case you are feeling generous for the upcoming holiday season.
And speaking of the holiday season, I hear Santa is thinking about a
Lightning to replace his sleigh and 8 reindeer - faster, more economical, and
sexier. You also know he keeps a naughty and nice list, and if you send some
feedback on the newsletter, I'll put in a good work for you to get on the
nice list. Other wise, you're naughty.
Blue skies,
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: kayberg(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 01, 2009
Subject: Media Star
Hey Gang,
Did you notice our own media star in print again? Or at least a picture?
Check out Page 58 of the December 2009 Sport Aviation.
This time he is shilling for Sensenich Props, but his Esqual LS shares the
spotlight.
Good Job, Buz. We love ya!!
Doug Koenigsberg
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Dec 01, 2009
Subject: Re: Media Star
Thanks, Doug, I really appreciate the sentiment. But so far I have not
been invited to appear on "Dancing With the Stars", so I envy you and that
tap dancing ability you have. What a talent.
Blue Skies,
Buz
In a message dated 12/1/2009 7:22:02 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
kayberg(at)aol.com writes:
Hey Gang,
Did you notice our own media star in print again? Or at least a picture?
Check out Page 58 of the December 2009 Sport Aviation.
This time he is shilling for Sensenich Props, but his Esqual LS shares the
spotlight.
Good Job, Buz. We love ya!!
Doug Koenigsberg
(http://www.aeroelectric.com/)
(http://www.buildersbooks.com/)
(http://www.homebuilthelp.com/)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Date: Dec 01, 2009
Subject: Re: Media Star
In a message dated 12/1/2009 4:18:49 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
N1BZRich(at)aol.com writes:
Thanks, Doug, I really appreciate the sentiment. But so far I have not
been invited to appear on "Dancing With the Stars", so I envy you and that
tap dancing ability you have. What a talent.
Blue Skies,
Buz
What you might have observed was simply a bit of unexpected ice when I went
to walk across the parking lot.......nothing more. It might be called
"ice dancing", however.
Doug
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Media Star
Date: Dec 02, 2009
From: "James, Clive R" <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>
You need a pianist?
-----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: 01 December 2009 23:37
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Media Star
In a message dated 12/1/2009 4:18:49 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
N1BZRich(at)aol.com writes:
Thanks, Doug, I really appreciate the sentiment. But so far I
have not been invited to appear on "Dancing With the Stars", so I envy
you and that tap dancing ability you have. What a talent.
Blue Skies,
Buz
What you might have observed was simply a bit of unexpected ice when I
went to walk across the parking lot.......nothing more. It might be
called "ice dancing", however.
Doug
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 01, 2009
Subject: Re: Media Star
Wow, with Clive playing the piano and Doug doing some "ice" dancing, we are
well on the way towards forming a USO show for the troops. Do we have any
other dancers out there (?dancing "bear"?) or singers to help fill out
this group. Shall we call the group "The Lightning Strikers"?
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 01, 2009
Subject: Re: Media Star
From: Maxim Voronin <voroninmax(at)gmail.com>
I could import a dancing bear from mother Russia if need be. With a fur hat
and balalaika.
Max
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 8:04 PM, wrote:
> Wow, with Clive playing the piano and Doug doing some "ice" dancing, we
> are well on the way towards forming a USO show for the troops. Do we have
> any other dancers out there (?dancing "bear"?) or singers to help fill out
> this group. Shall we call the group "The Lightning Strikers"?
> Buz
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Media Star
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Dec 01, 2009
[quote="N1BZRich(at)aol.com"]Shall we call the group "The Lightning Strikers"?
Buz
> [b]
A friend the other day asked if I was going to call myself Goose or Maverick with
the Lightning. I thought for a moment and told him I would be going by the
callsign "Thunderdolt". No typo. :)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=275685#275685
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Media Star
Date: Dec 02, 2009
Mark plays the tuba and I the trumpet so I am volunteering us too!
Nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 8:05 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Media Star
Wow, with Clive playing the piano and Doug doing some "ice" dancing, we are
well on the way towards forming a USO show for the troops. Do we have any
other dancers out there (?dancing "bear"?) or singers to help fill out this
group. Shall we call the group "The Lightning Strikers"?
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Re: Media Star
Date: Dec 02, 2009
No bill I think something like duck or webfoot for those awesome shoes you
have!
Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Strahan
Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 11:48 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Media Star
[quote="N1BZRich(at)aol.com"]Shall we call the group "The Lightning
Strikers"?
Buz
> [b]
A friend the other day asked if I was going to call myself Goose or Maverick
with the Lightning. I thought for a moment and told him I would be going by
the callsign "Thunderdolt". No typo. :)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=275685#275685
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Dec 02, 2009
Subject: Re: Media Star
So thunder "dolt" can walk on water? This is really getting interesting.
Also, I am glad to hear that Max, you and Mark will be joining the
entertainment committee, but I thought Mark was going to use his tuba as a pitot
tube on his aluminum Canzer.
Blue skies,
Buz
In a message dated 12/2/2009 9:53:19 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
info(at)flylightning.net writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "flylightning"
No bill I think something like duck or webfoot for those awesome shoes you
have!
Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Strahan
Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 11:48 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Media Star
[quote="N1BZRich(at)aol.com"]Shall we call the group "The Lightning
Strikers"?
Buz
> [b]
A friend the other day asked if I was going to call myself Goose or
Maverick
with the Lightning. I thought for a moment and told him I would be going
by
the callsign "Thunderdolt". No typo. :)
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=275685#275685
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 02, 2009
Subject: Re: Media Star
From: Maxim Voronin <voroninmax(at)gmail.com>
With minor modifications that could potentially be turned 180 degrees and
used for Jet-Assisted-Take-Off. The only thing to keep in mind is the thrust
to weight ratio (Case of Myth Busters Jet Powered Impala
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ORXv_1XlDY which didn't get airborne versus
certain Soviet Airforce supply warrant-officer and his motorcycle with a
sidecar and a MiG-21 JATO booster
http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/zimolaviation/4422/ - which is yet to
be found. Considering the fact that warrant officer is alive and well -
don't hold on too tight)
Max
On Dec 2, 2009 11:12 AM, wrote:
So thunder "dolt" can walk on water? This is really getting interesting.
Also, I am glad to hear that Max, you and Mark will be joining the
entertainment committee, but I thought Mark was going to use his tuba as a
pitot tube on his aluminum Canzer.
Blue skies,
Buz
In a message dated 12/2/2009 9:53:19 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
info(at)flylightning.net writes:
info(at)flylightning.net> > > No bill I thin...
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=275685#275685================================================nbsp;
(And Get Some AWESOME FREE to find Gifts tric re b k you for p;
-Matt Dralle, List ======================== Use the ties Day
================================================ - MATRONICS
WEB FORUMS =================================================
Please Support You...
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: December News Letter.
Date: Dec 02, 2009
Anyone read the news Letter this Month?
Hope you all read the article on the new 51% rule and how it will work with
the Lightning Kit.
I have scanned the 51% checklist that we filled out and it is available to
anyone who wants it.
The catch is I am only gonna give it up if you can tell me how Gerds kit got
to germany. Better read up.
Seriously we need some could feed back on the news letter to make it more
informative to the builders and flyers out there of the Lightning.
If there is something you really want to see added each month that we are
not doing please suggest it.
Builders out there send in your tech article's, I know for a fact from the
phone calls that the manual isn't perfect and well neither am I so ,
I know there are things you guys have solved out there to make building
easier.
We can only make the news letter what you want it to be.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Date: Dec 02, 2009
Subject: Re: Media Star
My wife suggests I use the call sign of "Potbelly Pig" or "Dainbramage"
but I am not sure why.
I dont willingly perform in public, however, so perhaps others can take my
place in this now growing band. Besides, my skill level as a dancer is on
par with my flying skills. Speaking of which,
Why is it that you can fly an airplane for 50-100 hours and make hundreds
of landings and no one calls you "Skilled" or nominates you for the Sully
Award? But just hit the ground a little hard ONE TIME, crunching this and
that, and everybody calls you "Crash". Doesnt seem right.
Now all this started because I tried to say something nice about Buz. I
am just glad I didnt talk about all that other stuff I know about him.
Doug
In a message dated 12/2/2009 12:09:57 PM Eastern Standard Time,
N1BZRich(at)aol.com writes:
So thunder "dolt" can walk on water? This is really getting interesting.
Also, I am glad to hear that Max, you and Mark will be joining the
entertainment committee, but I thought Mark was going to use his tuba as a pitot
tube on his aluminum Canzer.
Blue skies,
Buz
In a message dated 12/2/2009 9:53:19 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
info(at)flylightning.net writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "flylightning"
No bill I think something like duck or webfoot for those awesome shoes you
have!
Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Strahan
Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 11:48 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Media Star
[quote="N1BZRich(at)aol.com"]Shall we call the group "The Lightning
Strikers"?
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: December News Letter.
Date: Dec 02, 2009
Anyone read the news Letter this Month?
Hope you all read the article on the new 51% rule and how it will work with
the Lightning Kit.
I have scanned the 51% checklist that we filled out and it is available to
anyone who wants it.
The catch is I am only gonna give it up if you can tell me how Gerds kit got
to germany. Better read up.
Seriously we need some could feed back on the news letter to make it more
informative to the builders and flyers out there of the Lightning.
If there is something you really want to see added each month that we are
not doing please suggest it.
Builders out there send in your tech article's, I know for a fact from the
phone calls that the manual isn't perfect and well neither am I so ,
I know there are things you guys have solved out there to make building
easier.
We can only make the news letter what you want it to be.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 02, 2009
Subject: Re: Media Star
In a message dated 12/2/2009 1:12:44 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Kayberg(at)aol.com writes:
My wife suggests I use the call sign of "Potbelly Pig" or "Dainbramage"
but I am not sure why.
Hey Doug, just be happy she is not suggesting " Drain Bed".
And we really need you as a dancer, regardless of whether you bride call
you a Potbelly Pig or not (better than Porky). I can just see the Piglet
outfit you will wear with your skates.
And thanks for keeping all those secrets. I would hate to notify my
"Black world" friends to silence my good buddy, the ice dancing piglet.
All in jest,
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 02, 2009
Subject: Re: Media Star
Interesting videos, Max. Glad the Mig-21s I flew against didn't have the
JATO mod to help them in a turn.
Buz
In a message dated 12/2/2009 12:36:01 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
voroninmax(at)gmail.com writes:
With minor modifications that could potentially be turned 180 degrees and
used for Jet-Assisted-Take-Off. The only thing to keep in mind is the thrust
to weight ratio (Case of Myth Busters Jet Powered Impala
_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ORXv_1XlDY_ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ORXv_1XlDY)
which didn't get airborne versus certain Soviet Airforce supply
warrant-officer and his motorcycle with a sidecar and a MiG-21 JATO booster
_http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/zimolaviation/4422/_
(http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/zimolaviation/4422/) - which is yet to be found. Considering
the fact that warrant officer is alive and well - don't hold on too tight)
Max
On Dec 2, 2009 11:12 AM, <_N1BZRich(at)aol.com_ (mailto:N1BZRich(at)aol.com) >
wrote:
So thunder "dolt" can walk on water? This is really getting interesting.
Also, I am glad to hear that Max, you and Mark will be joining the
entertainment committee, but I thought Mark was going to use his tuba as a pitot
tube on his aluminum Canzer.
Blue skies,
Buz
In a message dated 12/2/2009 9:53:19 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
_info(at)flylightning.net_ (mailto:info(at)flylightning.net) writes:
<_info(at)flylightning.net_ (mailto:info(at)flylightning.net) > > > No bill I
thin..._http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=275685#275685=======================nbsp_
(http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=275685#275685====================
==nbsp) ; (And Get Some AWESOME FREE to find Gifts tric re b k you for p;
-Matt Dralle, List ======================== Use the ties
Day ======================= - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS
(http://www.aeroelectric.com/)
(http://www.buildersbooks.com/)
(http://www.homebuilthelp.com/)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 02, 2009
Subject: Re: December News Letter.
Hey Buz/Nick: I did read the newsletter this morning on Jim's site. I trie
d
on the Lightning site, but could only get to the November's letter. I
guess my computer does not update as often as it should. or maybe I shoul
d not
visit the Lightning site as much? I appreciate all the info in the
newsletter and apologize for not being able to get anything new going. (M
aybe next
month) (Gerd's kit made it home with the help of commercial freight and
a
big box)
Lynn
In a message dated 12/2/2009 1:11:56 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
info(at)flylightning.net writes:
Anyone read the news Letter this Month?
Hope you all read the article on the new 51% rule and how it will work
with the Lightning Kit.
I have scanned the 51% checklist that we filled out and it is available
to
anyone who wants it.
The catch is I am only gonna give it up if you can tell me how Gerds kit
got to germany. Better read up.
Seriously we need some could feed back on the news letter to make it more
informative to the builders and flyers out there of the Lightning.
If there is something you really want to see added each month that we are
not doing please suggest it.
Builders out there send in your tech article=99s, I know for a fact
from the
phone calls that the manual isn=99t perfect and well neither am I
so ,
I know there are things you guys have solved out there to make building
easier.
We can only make the news letter what you want it to be.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
========================
============
(http://www.aeroelectric.com/)
(http://www.buildersbooks.com/)
(http://www.homebuilthelp.com/)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
========================
============
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List)
========================
============
========================
============
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Media Star
Date: Dec 02, 2009
From: n5pb(at)aol.com
Buz,
Having been in the Air Force for 27 years, I've learned to "Tap Dance" qui
te a bit...
Bear
-----Original Message-----
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Sent: Tue, Dec 1, 2009 9:04 pm
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Media Star
Wow, with Clive playing the piano and Doug doing some "ice" dancing, we ar
e well on the way towards forming a USO show for the troops. Do we have
any other dancers out there (?dancing "bear"?) or singers to help fill ou
t this group. Shall we call the group "The Lightning Strikers"?
Buz
========================
===========
-
-= -- Please Support Your Lists This Month --
-= (And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
-
-= November is the Annual List Fund Raiser. Click on
-= the Contribution link below to find out more about
-= this year's Terrific Free Incentive Gifts provided
-= by:
-= * AeroElectric www.aeroelectric.com
-= * The Builder's Bookstore www.buildersbooks.com
-= * HomebuiltHELP www.homebuilthelp.com
-
-= List Contribution Web Site:
-
-= --> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
-
-= Thank you for your generous support!
-
-= -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-
-========================
========================
===========
-= - 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
-
-========================
========================
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: December News Letter.
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Ok you get the list if you want it..I am taking names and checking them
twice only those with the magic answer get the list!
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: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: December News Letter.
Hey Buz/Nick: I did read the newsletter this morning on Jim's site. I tried
on the Lightning site, but could only get to the November's letter. I guess
my computer does not update as often as it should. or maybe I should not
visit the Lightning site as much? I appreciate all the info in the
newsletter and apologize for not being able to get anything new going.
(Maybe next month) (Gerd's kit made it home with the help of commercial
freight and a big box)
Lynn
In a message dated 12/2/2009 1:11:56 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
info(at)flylightning.net writes:
Anyone read the news Letter this Month?
Hope you all read the article on the new 51% rule and how it will work with
the Lightning Kit.
I have scanned the 51% checklist that we filled out and it is available to
anyone who wants it.
The catch is I am only gonna give it up if you can tell me how Gerds kit got
to germany. Better read up.
Seriously we need some could feed back on the news letter to make it more
informative to the builders and flyers out there of the Lightning.
If there is something you really want to see added each month that we are
not doing please suggest it.
Builders out there send in your tech article's, I know for a fact from the
phone calls that the manual isn't perfect and well neither am I so ,
I know there are things you guys have solved out there to make building
easier.
We can only make the news letter what you want it to be.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
===================================
ttp://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroelectric.com
m/ href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com
"http://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.com
tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
t
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
===================================
ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
===================================
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: 51% checklist
Date: Dec 03, 2009
To group,
Ok, I have gotten a fair share of emails you all new the question. So the
answer is;
Go to the section on the web site that contains the build manual.
Below the build manual icon is now one for accessing the 51% checklist for
the Lightning.
Anyone with a lightning that is being built now and does not have an AWC
will have to give a copy of this to the DAR.
You must fill out your own but use this as a guide. Column A is a direct
fill in to your own check list. B C & D will be filled out depending on what
you have accomplished.
If building at home yours should look like ours, if you have assistance than
you may have to fill I some points in B. Hope this helps.
If anyone has any questions email the list so I can answer the question for
everyone.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Re: 51% checklist
From: Steven Sundquist <sttwig(at)gmail.com>
Showing my ignorance, what is an "AWC"?
Steve Sundquist
Kit #48
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:41 AM, flylightning wrote:
> To group,
>
>
> Ok, I have gotten a fair share of emails you all new the question. So the
> answer is;
>
> Go to the section on the web site that contains the build manual.
>
> Below the build manual icon is now one for accessing the 51% checklist for
> the Lightning.
>
> Anyone with a lightning that is being built now and does not have an AWC
> will have to give a copy of this to the DAR.
>
> You must fill out your own but use this as a guide. Column A is a direct
> fill in to your own check list. B C & D will be filled out depending on what
> you have accomplished.
>
> If building at home yours should look like ours, if you have assistance
> than you may have to fill I some points in B. Hope this helps.
>
> If anyone has any questions email the list so I can answer the question for
> everyone.
>
>
> Nick Otterback
>
> Arion Aircraft, LLC
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mark Stauffer" <mark(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: 51% checklist
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Airworthiness Certificate.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Steven
Sundquist
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 12:02 PM
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: 51% checklist
Showing my ignorance, what is an "AWC"?
Steve Sundquist
Kit #48
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 9:41 AM, flylightning
wrote:
To group,
Ok, I have gotten a fair share of emails you all new the question. So
the answer is;
Go to the section on the web site that contains the build manual.
Below the build manual icon is now one for accessing the 51% checklist
for the Lightning.
Anyone with a lightning that is being built now and does not have an AWC
will have to give a copy of this to the DAR.
You must fill out your own but use this as a guide. Column A is a direct
fill in to your own check list. B C & D will be filled out depending on what
you have accomplished.
If building at home yours should look like ours, if you have assistance
than you may have to fill I some points in B. Hope this helps.
If anyone has any questions email the list so I can answer the question
for everyone.
Nick Otterback
Arion Aircraft, LLC
"_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
.com/" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
ttp://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Re: December News Letter.
In a message dated 12/2/2009 5:21:20 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com writes:
Hey Buz/Nick: I did read the newsletter this morning on Jim's site. I
tried on the Lightning site, but could only get to the November's letter. I
guess my computer does not update as often as it should. or maybe I should not
visit the Lightning site as much? I appreciate all the info in the
newsletter and apologize for not being able to get anything new going. (Maybe
next
month) (Gerd's kit made it home with the help of commercial freight and a
big box)
Lynn
Lynn,
I often have the same trouble with my computer. A while back someone
mentioned some way to get the computer to update web sites (switches or
buttons to push?) but I can't remember. Anyway, You have done a good job of
sending info for past issues, so please keep it up. Send me an updated
photo of your jet when you get the chance.
Blue Skies,
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Re: Media Star
In a message dated 12/2/2009 5:21:14 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
n5pb(at)aol.com writes:
Having been in the Air Force for 27 years, I've learned to "Tap Dance"
quite a bit...
Hi Bear,
I figured you could "tap dance" so that is why I mentioned a "dancing
bear". Keep up the good foot work, and when you get a chance, give up an
update on how your flying is going.
Blue Skies,
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Bailing out
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Dec 03, 2009
My parachute should be delivered on Wednesday of next week. One of the things
that I want to use it for is spin testing of my Lightning.
For the record, I like spins. But, I have no experience spinning the Lightning
and every time I've spun an airplane for the first time I've worn a chute. But
having a chute is only useful if you have a safe way of exiting the airplane.
In a 150 aerobat the doors can be ejected for egress. Every other plane I've spun
had either a sliding canopy or an open cockpit.
Anyway, I've been thinking about this issue in the Lightning. I've opened the
canopy in flight, and have found that it takes quite a shove to get it to go very
far at all. In fact, more shove than I'll apply unless it's an emergency
because I am concerned I would do damage.
I tend towards the belief that I would get out of the plane if I REALLY needed
to. I've imagined laying on my back and trying to kick the canopy out, but that
leads to images of the canopy cracking outwards, only to trap my foot in it.
Now THAT would be a strange NTSB report.
Any opinions on what the failure mode would be if I rolled onto my back and tried
to kick the canopy out? (Please don't say my legs. I'm deadlifting 450 and
squatting 350.)
I've also considered removing the bolts that provide the hinge for the canopy and
replacing them each with a pin welded to a steel cable that would pivot 90
degrees around a point aligned with the pin before exiting under the panel on
the copilot side where both cables would attach to a handle. A hard yank on that
handle should pull both pins out and I hope the front of the canopy would
lift off and temporarily pivot around the canopy latch before departing the plane.
I'd be ducking below the panel regardless at that point. If I take this
route, I'll replace the bolts when I'm done with my sillyness.
Any other thoughts from the Jet Jockeys out there?
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276056#276056
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Re: December News Letter.
From: Maxim Voronin <voroninmax(at)gmail.com>
Pressing F5 usually works,and if that fails, I think it is Ctrl-F5 to
refresh the website and associated cache
Best regards,
Max
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 4:28 PM, wrote:
> In a message dated 12/2/2009 5:21:20 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com writes:
>
> Hey Buz/Nick: I did read the newsletter this morning on Jim's site. I tried
> on the Lightning site, but could only get to the November's letter. I guess
> my computer does not update as often as it should. or maybe I should not
> visit the Lightning site as much? I appreciate all the info in the
> newsletter and apologize for not being able to get anything new going.
> (Maybe next month) (Gerd's kit made it home with the help of commercial
> freight and a big box)
> Lynn
>
> Lynn,
> I often have the same trouble with my computer. A while back someone
> mentioned some way to get the computer to update web sites (switches or
> buttons to push?) but I can't remember. Anyway, You have done a good job of
> sending info for past issues, so please keep it up. Send me an updated
> photo of your jet when you get the chance.
> Blue Skies,
> Buz
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Computer update
Hey Max: Control F 5 did the job. Thanks for the info.
Lynn
>>Pressing F5 usually works,and if that fails, I think it is Ctrl-F5 to
refresh the website and associated cache
Best regards,
Max
<<
________________________________________________________________________________
From: IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Computer update
Hey Max: Control F 5 did the job. Thanks for the info.
Lynn
>>Pressing F5 usually works,and if that fails, I think it is Ctrl-F5 to
refresh the website and associated cache
Best regards,
Max
<<
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Re: Computer update
From: Maxim Voronin <voroninmax(at)gmail.com>
Welcome!
Max
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 5:40 PM, wrote:
> Hey Max: Control F 5 did the job. Thanks for the info.
> Lynn
>
> >>Pressing F5 usually works,and if that fails, I think it is Ctrl-F5 to
> refresh the website and associated cache
> Best regards,
>
> Max
> <<
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Re: December News Letter.
In a message dated 12/3/2009 5:49:32 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
voroninmax(at)gmail.com writes:
Pressing F5 usually works,and if that fails, I think it is Ctrl-F5 to
refresh the website and associated cache
Best regards,
Max
Bummer. Control F5 didn't work on my Dell. Any other ideas from you
computer experts?
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Re: Bailing out
In a message dated 12/3/2009 5:42:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Bill Strahan"
My parachute should be delivered on Wednesday of next week. One of the
things that I want to use it for is spin testing of my Lightning.
For the record, I like spins. But, I have no experience spinning the
Lightning and every time I've spun an airplane for the first time I've worn a
chute. But having a chute is only useful if you have a safe way of exiting
the airplane.
In a 150 aerobat the doors can be ejected for egress. Every other plane
I've spun had either a sliding canopy or an open cockpit.
Anyway, I've been thinking about this issue in the Lightning. I've opened
the canopy in flight, and have found that it takes quite a shove to get it
to go very far at all. In fact, more shove than I'll apply unless it's an
emergency because I am concerned I would do damage.
I tend towards the belief that I would get out of the plane if I REALLY
needed to. I've imagined laying on my back and trying to kick the canopy
out, but that leads to images of the canopy cracking outwards, only to trap my
foot in it. Now THAT would be a strange NTSB report.
Any opinions on what the failure mode would be if I rolled onto my back
and tried to kick the canopy out? (Please don't say my legs. I'm
deadlifting 450 and squatting 350.)
I've also considered removing the bolts that provide the hinge for the
canopy and replacing them each with a pin welded to a steel cable that would
pivot 90 degrees around a point aligned with the pin before exiting under
the panel on the copilot side where both cables would attach to a handle. A
hard yank on that handle should pull both pins out and I hope the front of
the canopy would lift off and temporarily pivot around the canopy latch
before departing the plane. I'd be ducking below the panel regardless at that
point. If I take this route, I'll replace the bolts when I'm done with
my sillyness.
Any other thoughts from the Jet Jockeys out there?
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276056#276056
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Re: December News Letter.
From: Maxim Voronin <voroninmax(at)gmail.com>
Try just the F5 while you are on the page. Should do the trick.
Max
PS Otherwise the fresh newsletter is here
flylightning.net/images/pdf/Newsletter 2-12.pdf - just copy and paste that
into your browser address field
PPS Thanks for a great read, Buz!
On Dec 3, 2009 8:51 PM, wrote:
In a message dated 12/3/2009 5:49:32 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
voroninmax(at)gmail.com writes: > > Pr...
Bummer. Control F5 didn't work on my Dell. Any other ideas from you
computer experts?
Buz
Please Support You...
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Re: Bailing out
Bill,
Last spring (late March and early April) I flew all the ASTM required
flight test profiles (including all the spin test) to get the Lightning
certified as a SLSA. The spin test flights were all flown in the prototype
Lightning since it had a ballistic parachute installed. The other flights
were flown in the silver demo Lightning. Nick and I had many long
discussions about bailing out of the Lightning and ways to jettison the canopy.
We
basically decided that in an out of control situation, trying to force the
canopy open and climbing out while the aircraft was spinning was not a real
good option. (Flat spins can be amazingly fast) Nick even tried to get
some explosive bolts so that we could jettison the canopy, but the regulations
required to even buy the explosive bolts made that option unworkable in a
reasonable time frame. So that is why I flew the spin test in the
prototype. If things went wrong, I would use the whole aircraft ballistic chute.
Didn't even wear the chute I owned for the Pitts, So your idea of having
pins to pull that would allow you to get rid of the canopy might be a good
option if you can work it out. We didn't really work on that option
because of the ballistic chute option we had. Note: If you make this type of
change to your Lightning, you will have to put it back into phase one testing
and who knows how many hours your FAA rep might require.
Up to this past March/April, this was the first time the long wing
Lightning had been spun. Nick had previously spun the original short wing with
no
problems, but not the long wing. ASTM requirements were for the light
sport compliant airplane to be spun at all CG ranges and all configurations.
>From lots of previous flights in many different Lightnings with the long
wing, I was not really concerned with possible spiral instability, but the
requirement to spin at full flaps did concern me quite a bit since from lots
of previous spin experience in the military and in numerous aerobatic
aircraft, I knew that flaps would tend to make the spin go flat. One other
thing - ASTM requirements were not for a fully developed spin - you could apply
anti spin controls during the incipient phase of the developing spin, or
to be more specific, the rules allowed me to apply anti spin controls at
either 3 seconds of spin or 1 turn - whichever came first. And that is
exactly what I did, particularly for the first spins at full aft CG and certainly
with the flaps down. It recovered, but not at quickly as the normal clean
spin situation.
I have a copy of all the written flight test results somewhere on my
computer and will look for the spin test flights and (with Nick's permission)
will post a copy of the spin test on the list, or maybe in the newsletter.
(What say you, Nick?)
Basically, the clean spin characteristics were excellent for forward CGs
and good for aft CGs and recovery was almost immediate as soon as I unloaded
the airplane. Clean and aft CG were not quite as quick to stop, but not
abnormal at all. Spins with flaps were much more a concern, but standard
anti spin controls were effective, but took some time. Don't try spins with
flaps.
So if you are going to spin, AND I SEE NO REASON TO DO THAT - THE
LIGHTNING FLIGHT MANUAL SAYS NO AEROBATICS AND NO INTENTIONAL SPINS, but if you
really must (will your insurance be valid if you are doing something not
approved in the POH?) only do so with no flaps deployed and a forward CG. Use
idle power and normal pro spin controls. Once you get the break - unload
and opposite rudder to stop the turn (normal anti spin controls). I started
all my spin test at 8,000.
Sorry this is so long, but I wanted to at least hit the highlights of the
story. I guess, my bottom line would be like I said above - I see no
reason to spin an airplane that the flight manual (Pilot's Operating Handbook)
says is not aerobatic and no intentional spins. I have no idea how
experienced you are in spins, but I have seen them go flat or even inverted when
they should not have. There are just a lot of variables that you really
can't always plan for. All airplanes are different, especially those built by
individuals from a kit. What I saw the prototype do, might not be what you
see your airplane do. Oh, another thing, have you jumped before or gone
through that type of training? Can you find the D ring in an OH SHIT
emergency? There really are a lot of things to think about before you make the
final decision to do this. I don't want this to sound negative, but just
want you to think about all the negative possibilities.
Blue Skies,
Buz
In a message dated 12/3/2009 5:42:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Bill Strahan"
. er to My parachute should be delivered on Wednesday of next week. One
of the things that I want to use it for is spin testing of my Lightning.
For the record, I like spins. But, I have no experience spinning the
Lightning and every time I've spun an airplane for the first time I've worn a
chute. But having a chute is only useful if you have a safe way of exiting
the airplane.
In a 150 aerobat the doors can be ejected for egress. Every other plane
I've spun had either a sliding canopy or an open cockpit.
Anyway, I've been thinking about this issue in the Lightning. I've opened
the canopy in flight, and have found that it takes quite a shove to get it
to go very far at all. In fact, more shove than I'll apply unless it's an
emergency because I am concerned I would do damage.
I tend towards the belief that I would get out of the plane if I REALLY
needed to. I've imagined laying on my back and trying to kick the canopy
out, but that leads to images of the canopy cracking outwards, only to trap my
foot in it. Now THAT would be a strange NTSB report.
Any opinions on what the failure mode would be if I rolled onto my back
and tried to kick the canopy out? (Please don't say my legs. I'm
deadlifting 450 and squatting 350.)
I've also considered removing the bolts that provide the hinge for the
canopy and replacing them each with a pin welded to a steel cable that would
pivot 90 degrees around a point aligned with the pin before exiting under
the panel on the copilot side where both cables would attach to a handle. A
hard yank on that handle should pull both pins out and I hope the front of
the canopy would lift off and temporarily pivot around the canopy latch
before departing the plane. I'd be ducking below the panel regardless at that
point. If I take this route, I'll replace the bolts when I'm done with my
sillyness.
Any other thoughts from the Jet Jockeys out there?
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276056#276056
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Re: December News Letter.
Thanks, Max, I'll try that. I get the newsletter when I go to the
Lightning site, but not when I go to Jim's site. Don't know what the difference
is.
On another subject, don't forget to send me everything you want in the Jan
newsletter (like your last name). Believe it or not, since this is another
holiday month, I have already started on the Jan issue.
Blue Skies,
Buz
In a message dated 12/3/2009 10:13:16 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
voroninmax(at)gmail.com writes:
Try just the F5 while you are on the page. Should do the trick.
Max
PS Otherwise the fresh newsletter is here
_flylightning.net/images/pdf/Newsletter_
(http://flylightning.net/images/pdf/Newsletter) 2-12.pdf - just copy and paste that into your browser
address field
PPS Thanks for a great read, Buz!
On Dec 3, 2009 8:51 PM, <_N1BZRich(at)aol.com_ (mailto:N1BZRich(at)aol.com) >
wrote:
In a message dated 12/3/2009 5:49:32 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
_voroninmax(at)gmail.com_ (mailto:voroninmax(at)gmail.com) writes: > > Pr...
Bummer. Control F5 didn't work on my Dell. Any other ideas from you
computer experts?
Buz
(http://www.aeroelectric.com/)
(http://www.buildersbooks.com/)
(http://www.homebuilthelp.com/)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List)
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 03, 2009
Subject: Re: December News Letter.
From: Maxim Voronin <voroninmax(at)gmail.com>
Will do, Buz.
Few things fun to write about the Florida demo and all things planned (kit
has been ordered, by the way, and I'm terrorizing Mark for all the good
info to make sure that she makes it to the S-n-F), but I'd rather confirm
some of the things first. For a teaser - picture of me playing around with
the panel realestate, capitalizing on new Dynon Skyviews.
Best regards,
Max (Voronin that is)
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:12 PM, wrote:
> Thanks, Max, I'll try that. I get the newsletter when I go to the
> Lightning site, but not when I go to Jim's site. Don't know what the
> difference is.
> On another subject, don't forget to send me everything you want in the Jan
> newsletter (like your last name). Believe it or not, since this is another
> holiday month, I have already started on the Jan issue.
> Blue Skies,
> Buz
>
> In a message dated 12/3/2009 10:13:16 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> voroninmax(at)gmail.com writes:
>
> Try just the F5 while you are on the page. Should do the trick.
>
> Max
> PS Otherwise the fresh newsletter is here
> flylightning.net/images/pdf/Newsletter 2-12.pdf - just copy and paste that
> into your browser address field
> PPS Thanks for a great read, Buz!
>
> On Dec 3, 2009 8:51 PM, wrote:
>
> In a message dated 12/3/2009 5:49:32 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> voroninmax(at)gmail.com writes: > > Pr...
> Bummer. Control F5 didn't work on my Dell. Any other ideas from you
> computer experts?
> Buz
>
> *
>
> ===================================
> ttp://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroelectric.com
>
> m/ href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com
> "http://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.com
> tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
> t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
> ====================================ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Bailing out
Date: Dec 04, 2009
I will look and see if I can find a video of this later=2C but I remember s
eeing a two camera view of an aerobatic aircraft demonstrating loss of SA d
uring a spin that went flat and then inverted. In the cockpit there was a
brief pause and it was nearly imperceptible when it transitioned to inverte
d. If you didn't know that you were then in an inverted spin and applied y
our normal anti-spin controls in the same direction as before then you are
tightening your spin.
Also something to think about is the force that a spin can put on your body
. Definitely wouldn't count on being able to kick out the canopy=2C much l
ess even being able to push it out. There are many stories of guys trying
to bail out of planes and the best they ever did was to wiggle around until
they could unbuckle and then they were thrown clear of the plane=2C someti
mes colliding with the plane on the way down and doing some bodily harm. I
had talked a little with Buz and Nick about designing a quick release cano
py. There is one that is used for air racing for the Lancair which makes t
he canopy a rear hinged variety. A few things bother me about this though.
I remember reading about I believe it was the F-86's that were loosing ca
nopies in flight. The way that they were loosing them turned out to be som
ebody installing screws upside down. This was allowing the canopy to come
off and twist which was making the pilots loose their heads=2C literally.
If I were going to design the canopy to fly free without taking my head off
I might do what some of the Russian ejection seats do=2C which deploy smal
l vanes and turn it in a favorable direction (up) and keep it tracking a st
raight line. Most people don't have the ability to thoroughly test somethi
ng like that on their own though.
Another thing that worries me is what will happen when the canopy is off.
We don't know what the Lightning would do. We do know what an Esqual will
do and it's not a good thing. If you're then in a spin and need to clear i
t=2C does it increase the loading and tightening of the spin? It could be
that you find yourself incapacitated. I believe the ultimate limit load fa
ctor for the Lightning was around 10G's. Now this isn't the operational li
mit load factor=2C I'm talking about the observed failure load factor. I'm
willing to bet that most people can't take about half of that for very lon
g without becoming incapacitated in some way. If you look at any books on
flight testing they will tell you that spin testing must be approached very
carefully as there's a higher than normal chance of loosing your aircraft
and possibly loosing your life. Just a few of my own thoughts. Brian W.
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Thu=2C 3 Dec 2009 23:09:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Bailing out
Bill=2C
Last spring (late March and early
April) I flew all the ASTM required flight test profiles (including all the
spin test) to get the Lightning certified as a SLSA. The spin test flights
were all flown in the prototype Lightning since it had a ballistic parachut
e
installed. The other flights were flown in the silver demo
Lightning. Nick and I had many long discussions about bailing out of the
Lightning and ways to jettison the canopy. We basically decided that in an
out of control situation=2C trying to force the canopy open and climbing ou
t while
the aircraft was spinning was not a real good option. (Flat spins can be
amazingly fast) Nick even tried to get some explosive bolts so that we coul
d
jettison the canopy=2C but the regulations required to even buy the explosi
ve
bolts made that option unworkable in a reasonable time frame. So that is
why I flew the spin test in the prototype. If things went wrong=2C I would
use the whole aircraft ballistic chute. Didn't even wear the chute I owned
for the Pitts=2C So your idea of having pins to pull that would allow you
to
get rid of the canopy might be a good option
if you can work it out. We didn't really work on that
option because of the ballistic chute option we had. Note: If you
make this type of change to your Lightning=2C you will have to put it back
into
phase one testing and who knows how many hours your FAA rep might require.
Up to this past March/April=2C this was the first time the long wing
Lightning had been spun. Nick had previously spun the original short wing
with no problems=2C but not the long wing. ASTM requirements were for the
light sport compliant airplane to be spun at all CG ranges and all
configurations. From lots of previous flights in many different
Lightnings with the long wing=2C I was not really concerned with possible s
piral
instability=2C but the requirement to spin at full flaps did concern me qui
te a
bit since from lots of previous spin experience in the military and in nume
rous
aerobatic aircraft=2C I knew that flaps would tend to make the spin go flat
.
One other thing - ASTM requirements were not for a fully developed spin - y
ou
could apply anti spin controls during the incipient phase of the developing
spin=2C or to be more specific=2C the rules allowed me to apply anti spin c
ontrols
at either 3 seconds of spin or 1 turn - whichever came first. And that is
exactly what I did=2C particularly for the first spins at full aft CG and
certainly with the flaps down. It recovered=2C but not at quickly as the
normal clean spin situation.
I have a copy of all the written flight test results somewhere on my
computer and will look for the spin test flights and (with Nick's
permission) will post a copy of the spin test on the list=2C or maybe in
the newsletter. (What say you=2C Nick?)
Basically=2C the clean spin characteristics were excellent
for forward CGs and good for aft CGs and recovery was almost immediate as
soon as I unloaded the airplane. Clean and aft CG were not quite as quick
to stop=2C but not abnormal at all. Spins with flaps were much more a
concern=2C but standard anti spin controls were effective=2C but took some
time. Don't try spins with flaps.
So if you are going to spin=2C AND I SEE NO REASON TO DO THAT - THE
LIGHTNING FLIGHT MANUAL SAYS NO AEROBATICS AND NO INTENTIONAL SPINS=2C
but if you really must (will your insurance be valid if you are doing somet
hing
not approved in the POH?) only do so with no flaps deployed and a forward
CG. Use idle power and normal pro spin controls. Once you get
the break - unload and opposite rudder to stop the turn (normal anti spin
controls). I started all my spin test at 8=2C000.
Sorry this is so long=2C but I wanted to at least hit the highlights of the
story. I guess=2C my bottom line would be like I said above - I see no
reason to spin an airplane that the flight manual (Pilot's Operating Handbo
ok)
says is not aerobatic and no intentional spins. I have no idea how
experienced you are in spins=2C but I have seen them go flat or even invert
ed when
they should not have. There are just a lot of variables that you really
can't always plan for. All airplanes are different=2C especially those bui
lt
by individuals from a kit. What I saw the prototype do=2C might not be wha
t
you see your airplane do. Oh=2C another thing=2C have you jumped before or
gone through that type of training? Can you find the D ring in an OH SHIT
emergency? There really are a lot of things to think about before you make
the final decision to do this. I don't want this to sound negative=2C but
just want you to think about all the negative possibilities.
Blue Skies=2C
Buz
In a message dated 12/3/2009 5:42:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time=2C
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
-->
Lightning-List message posted by: "Bill Strahan"
. er to My parachute should be delivered on
Wednesday of next week. One of the things that I want to use it for is
spin testing of my Lightning.
For the record=2C I like spins. But=2C
I have no experience spinning the Lightning and every time I've spun an
airplane for the first time I've worn a chute. But having a chute is
only useful if you have a safe way of exiting the airplane.
In a 150
aerobat the doors can be ejected for egress. Every other plane I've spun
had either a sliding canopy or an open cockpit.
Anyway=2C I've been
thinking about this issue in the Lightning. I've opened the canopy in
flight=2C and have found that it takes quite a shove to get it to go very
far at
all. In fact=2C more shove than I'll apply unless it's an emergency
because I am concerned I would do damage.
I tend towards the belief
that I would get out of the plane if I REALLY needed to. I've imagined
laying on my back and trying to kick the canopy out=2C but that leads to
images
of the canopy cracking outwards=2C only to trap my foot in it. Now THAT
would be a strange NTSB report.
Any opinions on what the failure
mode would be if I rolled onto my back and tried to kick the canopy out?
(Please don't say my legs. I'm deadlifting 450 and squatting
350.)
I've also considered removing the bolts that provide the hinge
for the canopy and replacing them each with a pin welded to a steel cable
that
would pivot 90 degrees around a point aligned with the pin before exiting
under the panel on the copilot side where both cables would attach to a
handle. A hard yank on that handle should pull both pins out and I hope
the front of the canopy would lift off and temporarily pivot around the c
anopy
latch before departing the plane. I'd be ducking below the panel
regardless at that point. If I take this route=2C I'll replace the bolts
when I'm done with my sillyness.
Any other thoughts from the Jet
Jockeys out there?
Bill
Read this topic online
here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276056#276056=====
================
_nbsp=3B
(And Get Some AWESOME FREE
to find
Gifts
tric
re
b
k you for
p=3B
-Matt Dralle=2C
List
========================
Use the
ties
Day
=======================
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS
========================
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with Messenger straight from your Hotmail inbox.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/hotmail_bl1/hotmail_bl1.aspx?o
cid=PID23879::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-ww:WM_IMHM_4:092009
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Bailing out
Date: Dec 04, 2009
Buz,
I do not mind you posting the Spin test report or cards. I think it will be
informative.
Nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 10:09 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Bailing out
Bill,
Last spring (late March and early April) I flew all the ASTM required
flight test profiles (including all the spin test) to get the Lightning
certified as a SLSA. The spin test flights were all flown in the prototype
Lightning since it had a ballistic parachute installed. The other flights
were flown in the silver demo Lightning. Nick and I had many long
discussions about bailing out of the Lightning and ways to jettison the
canopy. We basically decided that in an out of control situation, trying to
force the canopy open and climbing out while the aircraft was spinning was
not a real good option. (Flat spins can be amazingly fast) Nick even tried
to get some explosive bolts so that we could jettison the canopy, but the
regulations required to even buy the explosive bolts made that option
unworkable in a reasonable time frame. So that is why I flew the spin test
in the prototype. If things went wrong, I would use the whole aircraft
ballistic chute. Didn't even wear the chute I owned for the Pitts, So your
idea of having pins to pull that would allow you to get rid of the canopy
might be a good option if you can work it out. We didn't really work on
that option because of the ballistic chute option we had. Note: If you
make this type of change to your Lightning, you will have to put it back
into phase one testing and who knows how many hours your FAA rep might
require.
Up to this past March/April, this was the first time the long wing Lightning
had been spun. Nick had previously spun the original short wing with no
problems, but not the long wing. ASTM requirements were for the light sport
compliant airplane to be spun at all CG ranges and all configurations. From
lots of previous flights in many different Lightnings with the long wing, I
was not really concerned with possible spiral instability, but the
requirement to spin at full flaps did concern me quite a bit since from lots
of previous spin experience in the military and in numerous aerobatic
aircraft, I knew that flaps would tend to make the spin go flat. One other
thing - ASTM requirements were not for a fully developed spin - you could
apply anti spin controls during the incipient phase of the developing spin,
or to be more specific, the rules allowed me to apply anti spin controls at
either 3 seconds of spin or 1 turn - whichever came first. And that is
exactly what I did, particularly for the first spins at full aft CG and
certainly with the flaps down. It recovered, but not at quickly as the
normal clean spin situation.
I have a copy of all the written flight test results somewhere on my
computer and will look for the spin test flights and (with Nick's
permission) will post a copy of the spin test on the list, or maybe in the
newsletter. (What say you, Nick?)
Basically, the clean spin characteristics were excellent for forward CGs and
good for aft CGs and recovery was almost immediate as soon as I unloaded the
airplane. Clean and aft CG were not quite as quick to stop, but not
abnormal at all. Spins with flaps were much more a concern, but standard
anti spin controls were effective, but took some time. Don't try spins with
flaps.
So if you are going to spin, AND I SEE NO REASON TO DO THAT - THE LIGHTNING
FLIGHT MANUAL SAYS NO AEROBATICS AND NO INTENTIONAL SPINS, but if you really
must (will your insurance be valid if you are doing something not approved
in the POH?) only do so with no flaps deployed and a forward CG. Use idle
power and normal pro spin controls. Once you get the break - unload and
opposite rudder to stop the turn (normal anti spin controls). I started all
my spin test at 8,000.
Sorry this is so long, but I wanted to at least hit the highlights of the
story. I guess, my bottom line would be like I said above - I see no reason
to spin an airplane that the flight manual (Pilot's Operating Handbook) says
is not aerobatic and no intentional spins. I have no idea how experienced
you are in spins, but I have seen them go flat or even inverted when they
should not have. There are just a lot of variables that you really can't
always plan for. All airplanes are different, especially those built by
individuals from a kit. What I saw the prototype do, might not be what you
see your airplane do. Oh, another thing, have you jumped before or gone
through that type of training? Can you find the D ring in an OH SHIT
emergency? There really are a lot of things to think about before you make
the final decision to do this. I don't want this to sound negative, but
just want you to think about all the negative possibilities.
Blue Skies,
Buz
In a message dated 12/3/2009 5:42:30 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
. er to My parachute should be delivered on Wednesday of next week. One of
the things that I want to use it for is spin testing of my Lightning.
For the record, I like spins. But, I have no experience spinning the
Lightning and every time I've spun an airplane for the first time I've worn
a chute. But having a chute is only useful if you have a safe way of
exiting the airplane.
In a 150 aerobat the doors can be ejected for egress. Every other plane
I've spun had either a sliding canopy or an open cockpit.
Anyway, I've been thinking about this issue in the Lightning. I've opened
the canopy in flight, and have found that it takes quite a shove to get it
to go very far at all. In fact, more shove than I'll apply unless it's an
emergency because I am concerned I would do damage.
I tend towards the belief that I would get out of the plane if I REALLY
needed to. I've imagined laying on my back and trying to kick the canopy
out, but that leads to images of the canopy cracking outwards, only to trap
my foot in it. Now THAT would be a strange NTSB report.
Any opinions on what the failure mode would be if I rolled onto my back and
tried to kick the canopy out? (Please don't say my legs. I'm deadlifting
450 and squatting 350.)
I've also considered removing the bolts that provide the hinge for the
canopy and replacing them each with a pin welded to a steel cable that would
pivot 90 degrees around a point aligned with the pin before exiting under
the panel on the copilot side where both cables would attach to a handle. A
hard yank on that handle should pull both pins out and I hope the front of
the canopy would lift off and temporarily pivot around the canopy latch
before departing the plane. I'd be ducking below the panel regardless at
that point. If I take this route, I'll replace the bolts when I'm done with
my sillyness.
Any other thoughts from the Jet Jockeys out there?
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276056#276056==================
===========================
_nbsp; (And Get Some AWESOME FREE to find Gifts tric re b k you for
p; -Matt Dralle, List ======================== Use the
ties Day ================================================ -
MATRONICS WEB FORUMS =================================================
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Bailing out
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Dec 04, 2009
Buz,
Valid concerns and I appreciate all the input. What's a D ring? ;)
Just kidding. Back when I started flying aerobatics I decided to do the initial
training for an accelerated freefall license and make at least the first jump.
If I ever had to bail out I didn't want that to be my introduction to parachute
use as well!
Once I did that, I had a much better comfort level with how things might be if
I ever needed to use the emergency chute.
It's probably more for me and my curiousity than anything. And it's not just spin
training. I want to take the plane to VNE, and test it to 5g at gross. Every
plane is different, and I will achieve peace of mind from feeling that my
plane is proven in these areas.
As to the POH, my understanding is that I am the author of the POH for my plane
since it is experimental, not LSA. My operating limitations on the other hand
are clear. I will be talking to my FSDO about that prior to any spins and as
you point out will have to have those limitations changed.
After I'm done, I can change them again to be more restrictive and/or I can put
the restrictions in the POH. Is this how you understand it?
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276149#276149
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Bailing out
Date: Dec 04, 2009
From: "Givan, Max E (AS)" <max.givan(at)ngc.com>
Bill
Sounds like you are experienced in this type of testing and may be very
comfortable doing this. Don't really know your background. Just a few
thoughts.
I design tactical military aircraft for a living and I am very
experienced in aircraft spin analysis and departure/spin flight test. I
am also an experienced pilot and I would not deliberately spin a
previously untested aircraft without a lot of high angle of attack wind
tunnel data and detailed analytic spin analysis and simulation time
histories. Also there are wind tunnels which flow vertically and allow
models to be spun in the tunnel and spin characteristics evaluated. An
acceptable Plan B would be to add a well designed spin chute on the
aircraft. This is NOT one of the off the shelf ballistic chutes
currently available. A spin recovery chute is custom designed and
typically has much longer risers and sturdy construction.
Having said all that, I will be very interested in your results if you
go forward with your spin testing.
Max
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Strahan
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 2:41 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Bailing out
My parachute should be delivered on Wednesday of next week. One of the
things that I want to use it for is spin testing of my Lightning.
For the record, I like spins. But, I have no experience spinning the
Lightning and every time I've spun an airplane for the first time I've
worn a chute. But having a chute is only useful if you have a safe way
of exiting the airplane.
In a 150 aerobat the doors can be ejected for egress. Every other plane
I've spun had either a sliding canopy or an open cockpit.
Anyway, I've been thinking about this issue in the Lightning. I've
opened the canopy in flight, and have found that it takes quite a shove
to get it to go very far at all. In fact, more shove than I'll apply
unless it's an emergency because I am concerned I would do damage.
I tend towards the belief that I would get out of the plane if I REALLY
needed to. I've imagined laying on my back and trying to kick the
canopy out, but that leads to images of the canopy cracking outwards,
only to trap my foot in it. Now THAT would be a strange NTSB report.
Any opinions on what the failure mode would be if I rolled onto my back
and tried to kick the canopy out? (Please don't say my legs. I'm
deadlifting 450 and squatting 350.)
I've also considered removing the bolts that provide the hinge for the
canopy and replacing them each with a pin welded to a steel cable that
would pivot 90 degrees around a point aligned with the pin before
exiting under the panel on the copilot side where both cables would
attach to a handle. A hard yank on that handle should pull both pins
out and I hope the front of the canopy would lift off and temporarily
pivot around the canopy latch before departing the plane. I'd be
ducking below the panel regardless at that point. If I take this route,
I'll replace the bolts when I'm done with my sillyness.
Any other thoughts from the Jet Jockeys out there?
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276056#276056
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 04, 2009
Subject: Re: Bailing out
From: Maxim Voronin <voroninmax(at)gmail.com>
Bill,
Quick question - did you go through the whole AFF or just the beginning of
it? If just the later - towards the end of the course you are specifically
required to do "hop-and-pop" jumps to introduce yourself to the lower
altitude exits and deployment, as those are psychologically different.
In any event, I would not count on using a chute in a plane that is a tip-up
design and doesn't have a canopy release.
Best regards,
Max
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 9:01 AM, Bill Strahan wrote:
>
> Buz,
>
> Valid concerns and I appreciate all the input. What's a D ring? ;)
>
> Just kidding. Back when I started flying aerobatics I decided to do the
> initial training for an accelerated freefall license and make at least the
> first jump. If I ever had to bail out I didn't want that to be my
> introduction to parachute use as well!
>
> Once I did that, I had a much better comfort level with how things might be
> if I ever needed to use the emergency chute.
>
> It's probably more for me and my curiousity than anything. And it's not
> just spin training. I want to take the plane to VNE, and test it to 5g at
> gross. Every plane is different, and I will achieve peace of mind from
> feeling that my plane is proven in these areas.
>
> As to the POH, my understanding is that I am the author of the POH for my
> plane since it is experimental, not LSA. My operating limitations on the
> other hand are clear. I will be talking to my FSDO about that prior to any
> spins and as you point out will have to have those limitations changed.
>
> After I'm done, I can change them again to be more restrictive and/or I can
> put the restrictions in the POH. Is this how you understand it?
>
> Bill
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276149#276149
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 04, 2009
Subject: Re: Bailing out
In a message dated 12/4/2009 10:04:19 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Bill Strahan" _bill(at)gdsx.com_
(mailto:bill(at)gdsx.com)
Buz,
Valid concerns and I appreciate all the input. What's a D ring? ;)
Hey Bill, I like you sense of humor - the D ring comment.
.
And yes, the builder is responsible for writing the POH for the airplane he
builds. In the case of the Lightning, they provide a good one that only
needs the performance section filled out once you have completed your Phase
one testing and have those numbers and that data to put in the POH
performance section. This is once again, because all kit built aircraft can be
slightly different. But I agree that during phase one every builder should
be testing his aircraft to verify all the numbers and performance data. Too
many builders really don't test their airplanes - they just fly off the 40
hours without ever really knowing their "jets" real stall speeds, real V
numbers, flutter test, max gross weight test, etc., etc.
But do remember that the Lightning kit was sold as being non aerobatic and
no intentional spins. You have probably already guessed one of the reason
why - the canopy, and of course the extra liability. Anyway, if you do
decide to do your own spins, do talk to your FSDO (and insurance company) about
the limitations. Follow the recommendations I mentioned yesterday (no
flaps, idle power, forward CG and then after no more than one turn or 3
seconds (whichever comes first), apply standard anti spin controls). But don't
do that on test number one - work your way up to the full turn or 3 seconds.
Baby steps - kind of like Max was suggesting.
Let me add one other critical thing I didn't mention yesterday - be sure
the ailerons are centered. If they are not, the tendency to accelerate or
go flat is great. One trick I picked up when spin testing a new airplane
is to actually put a bright piece of tape on the instrument panel that is
exactly in front of the stick when the ailerons are neutral. You will be
surprised at how many airplanes are enough out of rig so that with neutral
stick you actually have roll command to one side or the other. So center the
ailerons and then mark the panel with bright yellow tape where the stick is
when the ailerons are centered. It also gives you an "aiming" mark on
upright spins as to where to push the stick when you want to unload. When I
was flying competition in my Pitts, I used a similar technique for
lomcevaks.
I was able to find the flight test write ups from when I was doing the ASTM
certification flights for the Special Light Sport Lightning and will send
them out either later tonight or tomorrow. Just remember that the two spin
tests flight profiles were just two of 25 different flight tests that were
required. Many flights went before the spins that allowed me to verify
certain flight characteristics before actually doing the spin tests. Again,
kind of like Max was suggesting. One other thing I didn't mention
yesterday was the thinking through all the maneuvers and test flights before
actually going up to fly them. For one thing, it helps you be more efficient
in
the air with the time, but it also allows you to think through the various
scenarios of things that may go wrong and how to react to them. I kept
remembering things from my Air Force days - such as if the airplane ever does
something you didn't ask it to do - unload. Unload for control will get
you out of a lot of problems, but you have to do it early enough before
something really bad develops into an uncontrollable situation. And the
Lightning did not have a drag chute to help get the pointy end of the airplane
back into the lead position.
Please feel free to ask any questions you may have, but remember to
evaluate whether or not the risks are worth the rewards - or vice versa.
Blue Skies,
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 04, 2009
Subject: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
All,
Reference the spin (and bailout) topic of the last few days that was
initiated by Bill Strahan, I have attached the two spin test write ups that
were accomplished for the Lightning to get ASTM certification as a Special
Light Sport Aircraft. These two flight test profiles were part of the
overall 25 flight test that were required for ASTM certification in the SLSA
category. Test profile #12 is at a forward CG and covers both clean and
landing flap spin tests. Test profile #13 is at an aft CG and also covers both
clean and landing flap spin tests. Depending on the level of interest, I
think Nick would approve all 25 of the flight test being published in
future newsletters. Let us know what you think.
Blue Skies,
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 04, 2009
Subject: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
All,
Reference the spin (and bailout) topic of the last few days that was
initiated by Bill Strahan, I have attached the two spin test write ups that
were accomplished for the Lightning to get ASTM certification as a Special
Light Sport Aircraft. These two flight test profiles were part of the
overall 25 flight test that were required for ASTM certification in the SLSA
category. Test profile #12 is at a forward CG and covers both clean and
landing flap spin tests. Test profile #13 is at an aft CG and also covers both
clean and landing flap spin tests. Depending on the level of interest, I
think Nick would approve all 25 of the flight test being published in
future newsletters. Let us know what you think.
Blue Skies,
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Bailing out
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Dec 04, 2009
Max:
No, I'm definitely NOT experienced with this type of stuff. I've flown some acro,
and done a lot of spins. I'm more comfortable with a spin than a loop, but
I've done it in planes that had some pretty well known and repeatable spin characteristics.
I'm not a great pilot nor do I have the background Buz brings
to the table. I just enjoy this stuff, and if I can do it while remaining safe
I will.
I did not go beyond my first jump. It was an all day course, followed by the jump.
It was not a tandem jump, I jumped and had the instructors with me, and
pulled my own cord. That was what I was wanting. I didn't want the AFF license,
I just wanted the experience of getting out of a plane, freefall, stabilization,
and pulling the cord. I didn't drop it. I DID freeze out on the wing
strut, which was one more reason I was happy I did the jump. I know if I ever
need to get out to just keep moving, don't pause.
Buz & Max:
You both bring up valid points. I may decide not to explore the spins at all,
but the points for me about bailing out remain. What's the point in testing to
VNE, or doing any type of flutter testing if you do not have a plan for things
going bad?
I don't want to see it go from TARFU during testing to FUBAR because I can't get
out.
The temptation is strong to just assume I'll get the canopy open somehow. The
responsible thing (if it exists in this context) is to ensure some method of canopy
jettison. I'll keep stewing on this one and let you guys know what I end
up doing.
Thanks for your input, it was EXACTLY what I was looking for on the list. What
a resource.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276276#276276
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Dec 04, 2009
Aw Buz, you tease! Am I missing the attachment somehow?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276277#276277
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Autopilot
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Dec 04, 2009
I dorked with my autopilot settings, static system, and all SORTS of crap trying
to get the dang thing to hold altitude. Mark said "just vent the static to
the cockpit."
I kept dorking around with it, trying just about everything to fix it. I finally
gave up two days ago and just did what Mark had been saying a few months ago.
Mark, feel free to send me one of Hallmark's new "I told you so" cards. :)
But the reason I'm posting is that I then kept playing with the settings and once
I set the Static Lag to 0 with it vented to the cockpit, it held altitude very
well even in some serious bumps and wind.
Which got me thinking, like any good programmer, to start backing out the changes
that didn't fix the problem. One of the changes recommended that I incorporated
originally was to move the autopilot pushrod to the innermost hole on the
control arm.
Of course, not only does that give the servo more torque to move the elevator,
it also gives the servo drag more torque to be placed into the control system.
I like light controls, so after I was certain everything was working well I
moved the autopilot pushrod to the outermost hole on the arm.
Not only could I immediately tell the difference on the ground in less servo drag
felt when moving full deflection, but I could also tell in the air, especially
when slow for landing. I was very happy with the change.
And it still held altitude perfectly! (This is another chance Mark, go ahead and
say it)
So if you have your autopilot altitude hold working, you might try moving to the
outermost hole on the control arm. Less servo drag, lighter controls.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276278#276278
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
In a message dated 12/5/2009 1:30:00 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Bill Strahan"
Aw Buz, you tease! Am I missing the attachment somehow?
I actually had to send this message (with attachments) out twice. The
first I got a message back from matronics saying that "The extension [docx] is
not allowed". The two spin test write ups had been docx files. So I then
saved the files as pdf and resent the message with the pdf attachments.
Seemed to go through fine. If anyone still didn't get the spin test write
ups, let me know. I will try again to the group or even send directly to
you.
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: EAFerguson(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
In a message dated 12/4/2009 11:55:08 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
N1BZRich(at)aol.com writes:
All,
Reference the spin (and bailout) topic of the last few days that was
initiated by Bill Strahan, I have attached the two spin test write ups that
were accomplished for the Lightning to get ASTM certification as a Special
Light Sport Aircraft. These two flight test profiles were part of the
overall 25 flight test that were required for ASTM certification in the SLSA
category. Test profile #12 is at a forward CG and covers both clean and
landing flap spin tests. Test profile #13 is at an aft CG and also covers both
clean and landing flap spin tests. Depending on the level of interest, I
think Nick would approve all 25 of the flight test being published in
future newsletters. Let us know what you think.
Blue Skies,
Buz
Reassuring, but unlike Bill, I don't get excited by spins. Did the ASTM
Certification require loops or aileron rolls?
Earl
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kayberg(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Bailing out
In a message dated 12/5/2009 1:29:40 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
Max:
No, I'm definitely NOT experienced with this type of stuff. I've flown
some acro, and done a lot of spins. I'm more comfortable with a spin than a
loop, but I've done it in planes that had some pretty well known and
repeatable spin characteristics. I'm not a great pilot nor do I have the
background Buz brings to the table. I just enjoy this stuff, and if I can do
it
while remaining safe I will.
This is more of a general response to Bill and others who are considering
trying more aggressive maneuvers in their Lightning's. I am not writing
as an expert in aerobatics. I am using several third party anecdotes.
It is just my mental compilations. It is what I have heard from "hangar
flying"
There seems to be several things that are universal to early attempts at
flying beyond the recommendations of the kit maker.
1) Assumptions that a little experience is enough to handle a Lightning.
That is OK if one is lucky. I have heard of 4 different pilots, at
least 2 were former Air Force jet jockeys (not Buz), who tried a sloppy roll
in a Lightning and ended up going straight down and needed a high G
pullout. The plane saved them because of its strength, but it was not a fun
time.
2) Assumptions that a Lightning is "like" something else, therefore it
reacts the same way. A couple of the previously mention pilots had high
performance aerobatic planes. They still screwed up their first roll.
3) Assuming you wont need to "get out" of the plane if something goes bad.
The best case here is the Cessna BugCatcher (SkyCatcher). On two
separate occasions, during spin testing, two different airplanes became
uncontrollable and ended up crashing. Parachutes saved the pilots, but the point
is that even experienced pilots with an intimate knowledge of a particular
airframe can end up badly..... Do you fly with personal rules? A good one
might be, no aerobatic attempts in a Lightning without A)a canopy release
and a parachute or B) an airframe chute. Which is why I am impressed by
Bill's willingness to raise the issue in the first place.
4) Assuming the plane's response wont be abrupt. If you read Buz's
accounts, you may recall he had a flap problem during testing and the plane
rolled upside down ....faster than even he could respond to. You will also note
to ENTER a spin, it was necessary to pitch the nose up at very high
angles. Same for doing departure stalls. If you work at doing aggressive
stalls, the plane can also respond aggressively. Remember Buz has a lot of
cautions about becoming inverted and entering flat spins.
5) Ignoring the cautions of people who have done aggressive maneuvers.
There is a reason the most experienced and skilled pilots of Lightnings dont
talk about what they can do in a Lightning. They are afraid someone who
overestimates their piloting skills will try it with fatal results. Not
because the airplane is unsafe, but it WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR AEROBATICS!!
6) Not thinking about the effect of their screw up on the "brand". We
know what the Feds just did to the Zenair Zodiac XL. It only took a handful
of crashes, without a single common cause, out of more than 1,000 flying to
"ground" that whole bunch. We have already lost a couple Lightning's
with no common cause.... out of a lot less than 1,000 flying. We really need
Lightning pilots to act wisely, not just for their sake but for the sake
of all of use who love the plane.
7) Not resisting temptation. We all know what it feels like to be buzzing
along on a great day strapped in a fine airplane. A few swerves, turns
and banks feel good and we think she wants to loop, roll or spin. Take a
cold shower first.
FWIW
Doug Koenigsberg
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Bailing out
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Doug=2C I'd like to add to your email there=2C comment number 3. Both C
essna Skycatchers had a ballistic parachute=2C the first failed to work pro
perly and the pilot then had to bail out. I don't remember if the second p
rototype worked correctly or not=2C I think it did=2C but the plane was des
troyed anyhow after repeated impact with the ground.
I agree with several assessments here. Flight test your aircraft to know t
hat your performance within the specified envelope. Go from what is known
to what is unknown in small steps and expect the unexpected and give yourse
lf multiple outs. Either don't risk doing things like spin testing or do s
o with an experienced test pilot and test profile. Brian W.
From: Kayberg(at)aol.com
Date: Sat=2C 5 Dec 2009 09:31:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Re: Bailing out
In a message dated 12/5/2009 1:29:40 A.M. Eastern Standard Time=2C
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
Max:
No=2C I'm definitely NOT experienced with this type of
stuff. I've flown some acro=2C and done a lot of spins. I'm more
comfortable with a spin than a loop=2C but I've done it in planes that ha
d some
pretty well known and repeatable spin characteristics. I'm not a great
pilot nor do I have the background Buz brings to the table. I just enjoy
this stuff=2C and if I can do it while remaining safe I
will.
This is more of a general response to Bill and others who are considering
trying more aggressive maneuvers in their Lightning's. I am
not writing as an expert in aerobatics. I am using several
third party anecdotes. It is just my mental
compilations. It is what I have heard from "hangar flying"
There seems to be several things that are universal to early attempts at
flying beyond the recommendations of the kit maker.
1) Assumptions that a little experience is enough to handle a
Lightning. That is OK if one is lucky. I have heard of 4
different pilots=2C at least 2 were former Air Force jet jockeys (not
Buz)=2C who tried a sloppy roll in a Lightning and ended up going
straight down and needed a high G pullout. The plane saved
them because of its strength=2C but it was not a fun time.
2) Assumptions that a Lightning is "like" something else=2C therefore it
reacts the same way. A couple of the previously mention pilots
had high performance aerobatic planes. They still screwed up
their first roll.
3) Assuming you wont need to "get out" of the plane if something
goes bad. The best case here is the Cessna BugCatcher
(SkyCatcher). On two separate occasions=2C during spin
testing=2C two different airplanes became uncontrollable and ended up
crashing. Parachutes saved the pilots=2C but the point is that even
experienced pilots with an intimate knowledge of a particular airframe can
end up badly..... Do you fly with personal rules? A good one
might be=2C no aerobatic attempts in a Lightning without A)a canopy release
and a parachute or B) an airframe chute. Which is why I am impressed
by Bill's willingness to raise the issue in the first place.
4) Assuming the plane's response wont be abrupt. If you read
Buz's accounts=2C you may recall he had a flap problem during testing and t
he
plane rolled upside down ....faster than even he could respond
to. You will also note to ENTER a spin=2C it was necessary to
pitch the nose up at very high angles. Same for doing departure
stalls. If you work at doing aggressive stalls=2C the plane can also
respond aggressively. Remember Buz has a lot of cautions about
becoming inverted and entering flat spins.
5) Ignoring the cautions of people who have done aggressive
maneuvers. There is a reason the most experienced and skilled pilots
of Lightnings dont talk about what they can do in a Lightning. They are
afraid someone who overestimates their piloting skills will try it with fat
al
results. Not because the airplane is unsafe=2C but it WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR
AEROBATICS!!
6) Not thinking about the effect of their screw up on the
"brand". We know what the Feds just did to the Zenair Zodiac
XL. It only took a handful of crashes=2C without a single common cause=2C
out
of more than 1=2C000 flying to "ground" that whole bunch. We have
already lost a couple Lightning's with no common cause.... out of a lot les
s
than 1=2C000 flying. We really need Lightning pilots to act wisely=2C
not just for their sake but for the sake of all of use who love the
plane.
7) Not resisting temptation. We all know what it feels like to be
buzzing along on a great day strapped in a fine airplane.
A few swerves=2C turns and banks feel good and we think she wants to loop
=2C roll or
spin. Take a cold shower first.
FWIW
Doug Koenigsberg
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Hotmail gives you a free=2Cexclusive gift.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/hotmail_bl1/hotmail_bl1.aspx?o
cid=PID23879::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-ww:WM_IMHM_7:092009
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Bailing out
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Doug:
Good points! I have thought to myself a few times how Nick probably has his head
in his hands saying "No, Bill, control yourself!"
:)
Your description of the bad turnout of the attempted rolls resonates with me.
I have to say I wouldn't think twice about a roll in an RV, but with the long
wingtips the roll rate on the Lightning is just not fast enough for me to be comfortable
with it.
I flew a bunch in a Giles 202 one summer, and the pilot I flew with showed me how
people botch a roll. The lesson stuck with me, even though there was no risk
in the Giles.
Back to the Lightning, my thought was it would be easy to not pull the nose up
enough (or too much!) and botch a roll because of the slower roll rate, especially
if you didn't unload it through inverted.
The plane feels sporty, and that can make it tempting. While I'm sure it can be
done safely, and I'm also sure many have done it, I haven't.
Bill
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276308#276308
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Date: Dec 05, 2009
I only read the web version of the list, and I'm not seeing the attachment.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276310#276310
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 05, 2009
From: Rosalie <rosestar(at)sonic.net>
Subject: Bailing Out
Doug's comments are very wise.
I am one of those Zodiac owners. I am parting out my airplane for
specific reasons.
However, some of us pilots are aware of the conditions in which those
airplanes were flown when they crashed...250# over gross, extreme high
speed low pass, aggressive speeds in an airplane at 1200#. These are
pilot issues. The point is that these LSA's are extremely light
aircraft which are advertised to fly at 138 mph. In my opinion that is
WAY over acceptable speeds for the aluminum airframes, and the tube and
fabric airframes. What could have saved lives? Answer: prudent and
conservative flying. These are not aerobatic airplanes. If someone
wants to fly it aggressively, then they risk their own life, but also
impact the future of other owners.
Now...I am on this list because I am contemplating a purchase of a
Lightening for its structural strength. But, I would not consider
aerobatics in it.
("Sad") Brad
former Zodiac builder/pilot.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: n1bzrich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:14:45 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
EAFerguson(at)aol.com writes:
Did the ASTM Certification require loops or aileron rolls?
No, loops and rolls were not required. Roll response was measured by
timing roll reversals as I recall. I guess I need to go back and read all 25
of the flight test.
Did you get the attachments that had the spin write ups? Or anyone else?
I am trying to figure out if I need to try some other way to send them.
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: n1bzrich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Bailing out
Doug,
Well stated, Doug, and outstanding advise. You remain a sage of down
to earth wisdom. Maybe because of your knowledge that sh*t goes downhill.
;-)
Buz
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:45:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, Kaybe
rg(at)aol.com writes:.
This is more of a general response to Bill and others who are considering
trying more aggressive maneuvers in their Lightning's. I am not writing
as an expert in aerobatics. I am using several third party anecdotes.
It is just my mental compilations. It is what I have heard from "hangar
flying"
There seems to be several things that are universal to early attempts at
flying beyond the recommendations of the kit maker.
1) Assumptions that a little experience is enough to handle a Lightning.
That is OK if one is lucky. I have heard of 4 different pilots, at
least 2 were former Air Force jet jockeys (not Buz), who tried a sloppy roll
in a Lightning and ended up going straight down and needed a high G
pullout. The plane saved them because of its strength, but it was not a fun
time.
2) Assumptions that a Lightning is "like" something else, therefore it
reacts the same way. A couple of the previously mention pilots had high
performance aerobatic planes. They still screwed up their first roll.
3) Assuming you wont need to "get out" of the plane if something goes bad.
The best case here is the Cessna BugCatcher (SkyCatcher). On two
separate occasions, during spin testing, two different airplanes became
uncontrollable and ended up crashing. Parachutes saved the pilots, but the point
is that even experienced pilots with an intimate knowledge of a particular
airframe can end up badly..... Do you fly with personal rules? A good
one might be, no aerobatic attempts in a Lightning without A)a canopy release
and a parachute or B) an airframe chute. Which is why I am impressed by
Bill's willingness to raise the issue in the first place.
4) Assuming the plane's response wont be abrupt. If you read Buz's
accounts, you may recall he had a flap problem during testing and the plane
rolled upside down ....faster than even he could respond to. You will also note
to ENTER a spin, it was necessary to pitch the nose up at very high
angles. Same for doing departure stalls. If you work at doing aggressive
stalls, the plane can also respond aggressively. Remember Buz has a lot of
cautions about becoming inverted and entering flat spins.
5) Ignoring the cautions of people who have done aggressive maneuvers.
There is a reason the most experienced and skilled pilots of Lightnings dont
talk about what they can do in a Lightning. They are afraid someone who
overestimates their piloting skills will try it with fatal results. Not
because the airplane is unsafe, but it WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR AEROBATICS!!
6) Not thinking about the effect of their screw up on the "brand". We
know what the Feds just did to the Zenair Zodiac XL. It only took a handful
of crashes, without a single common cause, out of more than 1,000 flying to
"ground" that whole bunch. We have already lost a couple Lightning's
with no common cause.... out of a lot less than 1,000 flying. We really need
Lightning pilots to act wisely, not just for their sake but for the sake
of all of use who love the plane.
7) Not resisting temptation. We all know what it feels like to be buzzing
along on a great day strapped in a fine airplane. A few swerves, turns
and banks feel good and we think she wants to loop, roll or spin. Take a
cold shower first.
FWIW
Doug Koenigsberg
(http://www.aeroelectric.com/)
(http://www.buildersbooks.com/)
(http://www.homebuilthelp.com/)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: n1bzrich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Bailing out
Doug,
Well stated, Doug, and outstanding advise. You remain a sage of down
to earth wisdom. Maybe because of your knowledge that sh*t goes downhill.
;-)
Buz
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:45:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, Kaybe
rg(at)aol.com writes:.
This is more of a general response to Bill and others who are considering
trying more aggressive maneuvers in their Lightning's. I am not writing
as an expert in aerobatics. I am using several third party anecdotes.
It is just my mental compilations. It is what I have heard from "hangar
flying"
There seems to be several things that are universal to early attempts at
flying beyond the recommendations of the kit maker.
1) Assumptions that a little experience is enough to handle a Lightning.
That is OK if one is lucky. I have heard of 4 different pilots, at
least 2 were former Air Force jet jockeys (not Buz), who tried a sloppy roll
in a Lightning and ended up going straight down and needed a high G
pullout. The plane saved them because of its strength, but it was not a fun
time.
2) Assumptions that a Lightning is "like" something else, therefore it
reacts the same way. A couple of the previously mention pilots had high
performance aerobatic planes. They still screwed up their first roll.
3) Assuming you wont need to "get out" of the plane if something goes bad.
The best case here is the Cessna BugCatcher (SkyCatcher). On two
separate occasions, during spin testing, two different airplanes became
uncontrollable and ended up crashing. Parachutes saved the pilots, but the point
is that even experienced pilots with an intimate knowledge of a particular
airframe can end up badly..... Do you fly with personal rules? A good
one might be, no aerobatic attempts in a Lightning without A)a canopy release
and a parachute or B) an airframe chute. Which is why I am impressed by
Bill's willingness to raise the issue in the first place.
4) Assuming the plane's response wont be abrupt. If you read Buz's
accounts, you may recall he had a flap problem during testing and the plane
rolled upside down ....faster than even he could respond to. You will also note
to ENTER a spin, it was necessary to pitch the nose up at very high
angles. Same for doing departure stalls. If you work at doing aggressive
stalls, the plane can also respond aggressively. Remember Buz has a lot of
cautions about becoming inverted and entering flat spins.
5) Ignoring the cautions of people who have done aggressive maneuvers.
There is a reason the most experienced and skilled pilots of Lightnings dont
talk about what they can do in a Lightning. They are afraid someone who
overestimates their piloting skills will try it with fatal results. Not
because the airplane is unsafe, but it WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR AEROBATICS!!
6) Not thinking about the effect of their screw up on the "brand". We
know what the Feds just did to the Zenair Zodiac XL. It only took a handful
of crashes, without a single common cause, out of more than 1,000 flying to
"ground" that whole bunch. We have already lost a couple Lightning's
with no common cause.... out of a lot less than 1,000 flying. We really need
Lightning pilots to act wisely, not just for their sake but for the sake
of all of use who love the plane.
7) Not resisting temptation. We all know what it feels like to be buzzing
along on a great day strapped in a fine airplane. A few swerves, turns
and banks feel good and we think she wants to loop, roll or spin. Take a
cold shower first.
FWIW
Doug Koenigsberg
(http://www.aeroelectric.com/)
(http://www.buildersbooks.com/)
(http://www.homebuilthelp.com/)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rick Bowen <rollnloop(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Hey Buz=2C
I got the attachments---But I could not open them (?)....
Not sure why=2C I pretty much have no issues when you send out stuff.
I HAVE had problems a couple of times when the Arion folks have sent attach
ments.
Computers.....some days I love 'em=2C some days I HATE 'em!!!
Rick
From: n1bzrich(at)aol.com
Date: Sat=2C 5 Dec 2009 11:24:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certific
ation
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:14:45 A.M. Eastern Standard Time=2C EAFergus
on(at)aol.com writes:
Did the ASTM Certification require loops or aileron rolls?
No=2C loops and rolls were not required. Roll response was measured by tim
ing roll reversals as I recall. I guess I need to go back and read all 25
of the flight test.
Did you get the attachments that had the spin write ups? Or anyone else?
I am trying to figure out if I need to try some other way to send them.
Buz
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Hotmail gives you a free=2Cexclusive gift.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/hotmail_bl1/hotmail_bl1.aspx?o
cid=PID23879::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-ww:WM_IMHM_7:092009
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 05, 2009
From: Rosalie <rosestar(at)sonic.net>
Subject: Re: Bailing out
Doug's comments are very wise.
I am one of those Zodiac owners. I am parting out my airplane for
specific reasons.
However, some of us pilots are aware of the conditions in which those
airplanes were flown when they crashed...250# over gross, extreme high
speed low pass, aggressive speeds in an airplane at 1200#. These are
pilot issues. The point is that these LSA's are extremely light
aircraft which are advertised to fly at 138 mph. In my opinion that is
WAY over acceptable speed for the aluminum airframes, and the tube and
fabric airframes. What could have saved lives? Answer: prudent and
conservative flying. These are not aerobatic airplanes. If someone
wants to fly it aggressively, then they risk their own life, but also
impact the future of other owners.
Now...I am on this list because I am contemplating a purchase of a
Lightening for its structural strength. But, I would not consider
aerobatics in it.
("Sad") Brad
former Zodiac builder/pilot.
n1bzrich(at)aol.com wrote:
> Doug,
> Well stated, Doug, and outstanding advise. You remain a sage of
> down to earth wisdom. Maybe because of your knowledge that sh*t goes
> downhill. ;-)
> Buz
>
>
> In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:45:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> Kayberg(at)aol.com writes:.
>
> This is more of a general response to Bill and others who are
> considering trying more aggressive maneuvers in their
> Lightning's. I am not writing as an expert in aerobatics. I
> am using several third party anecdotes. It is just my mental
> compilations. It is what I have heard from "hangar flying"
>
> There seems to be several things that are universal to early
> attempts at flying beyond the recommendations of the kit maker.
>
> 1) Assumptions that a little experience is enough to handle a
> Lightning. That is OK if one is lucky. I have heard of 4
> different pilots, at least 2 were former Air Force jet jockeys
> (not Buz), who tried a sloppy roll in a Lightning and ended up
> going straight down and needed a high G pullout. The plane
> saved them because of its strength, but it was not a fun time.
>
> 2) Assumptions that a Lightning is "like" something else,
> therefore it reacts the same way. A couple of the previously
> mention pilots had high performance aerobatic planes. They still
> screwed up their first roll.
>
> 3) Assuming you wont _need_ to "get out" of the plane if something
> goes bad. The best case here is the Cessna BugCatcher
> (SkyCatcher). On two separate occasions, during spin
> testing, two different airplanes became uncontrollable and ended
> up crashing. Parachutes saved the pilots, but the point is that
> even experienced pilots with an intimate knowledge of a particular
> airframe can end up badly..... Do you fly with personal rules?
> A good one might be, no aerobatic attempts in a Lightning without
> A)a canopy release and a parachute or B) an airframe chute.
> Which is why I am impressed by Bill's willingness to raise the
> issue in the first place.
>
> 4) Assuming the plane's response wont be abrupt. If you read
> Buz's accounts, you may recall he had a flap problem during
> testing and the plane rolled upside down ....faster than even
> he could respond to. You will also note to ENTER a spin, it was
> necessary to pitch the nose up at very high angles. Same for
> doing departure stalls. If you work at doing aggressive stalls,
> the plane can also respond aggressively. Remember Buz has a lot
> of cautions about becoming inverted and entering flat spins.
>
> 5) Ignoring the cautions of people who have done aggressive
> maneuvers. There is a reason the most experienced and skilled
> pilots of Lightnings dont talk about what they can do in a
> Lightning. They are afraid someone who overestimates their
> piloting skills will try it with fatal results. Not because the
> airplane is unsafe, but it WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR AEROBATICS!!
>
> 6) Not thinking about the effect of their screw up on the
> "brand". We know what the Feds just did to the Zenair Zodiac
> XL. It only took a handful of crashes, without a single common
> cause, out of more than 1,000 flying to "ground" that whole
> bunch. We have already lost a couple Lightning's with no common
> cause.... out of a lot less than 1,000 flying. We really need
> Lightning pilots to act wisely, not just for their sake but for
> the sake of all of use who love the plane.
>
> 7) Not resisting temptation. We all know what it feels like to be
> buzzing along on a great day strapped in a fine airplane. A few
> swerves, turns and banks feel good and we think she wants to loop,
> roll or spin. Take a cold shower first.
>
> FWIW
>
> Doug Koenigsberg
>
> *
>
> ===================================
> ttp://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroelectric.com
> m/ href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com
> "http://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.com
> tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ===================================
> t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
> ===================================
> ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
> ===================================
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "flylightning" <info(at)flylightning.net>
Subject: Re: Bailing out
Date: Dec 05, 2009
I am reading all of this and all good points from all, see the voice has not
had to speak in this case. However I would like to point something out,
It snowed last night here in TN and it is freakin cold!!!
Nick
_____
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, December 05, 2009 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Re: Bailing out
Doug,
Well stated, Doug, and outstanding advise. You remain a sage of down to
earth wisdom. Maybe because of your knowledge that sh*t goes downhill. ;-)
Buz
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:45:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Kayberg(at)aol.com writes:.
This is more of a general response to Bill and others who are considering
trying more aggressive maneuvers in their Lightning's. I am not writing
as an expert in aerobatics. I am using several third party anecdotes.
It is just my mental compilations. It is what I have heard from "hangar
flying"
There seems to be several things that are universal to early attempts at
flying beyond the recommendations of the kit maker.
1) Assumptions that a little experience is enough to handle a Lightning.
That is OK if one is lucky. I have heard of 4 different pilots, at least 2
were former Air Force jet jockeys (not Buz), who tried a sloppy roll in a
Lightning and ended up going straight down and needed a high G pullout.
The plane saved them because of its strength, but it was not a fun time.
2) Assumptions that a Lightning is "like" something else, therefore it
reacts the same way. A couple of the previously mention pilots had high
performance aerobatic planes. They still screwed up their first roll.
3) Assuming you wont need to "get out" of the plane if something goes bad.
The best case here is the Cessna BugCatcher (SkyCatcher). On two separate
occasions, during spin testing, two different airplanes became
uncontrollable and ended up crashing. Parachutes saved the pilots, but the
point is that even experienced pilots with an intimate knowledge of a
particular airframe can end up badly..... Do you fly with personal rules?
A good one might be, no aerobatic attempts in a Lightning without A)a canopy
release and a parachute or B) an airframe chute. Which is why I am
impressed by Bill's willingness to raise the issue in the first place.
4) Assuming the plane's response wont be abrupt. If you read Buz's
accounts, you may recall he had a flap problem during testing and the plane
rolled upside down ....faster than even he could respond to. You will also
note to ENTER a spin, it was necessary to pitch the nose up at very high
angles. Same for doing departure stalls. If you work at doing aggressive
stalls, the plane can also respond aggressively. Remember Buz has a lot of
cautions about becoming inverted and entering flat spins.
5) Ignoring the cautions of people who have done aggressive maneuvers.
There is a reason the most experienced and skilled pilots of Lightnings dont
talk about what they can do in a Lightning. They are afraid someone who
overestimates their piloting skills will try it with fatal results. Not
because the airplane is unsafe, but it WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR AEROBATICS!!
6) Not thinking about the effect of their screw up on the "brand". We know
what the Feds just did to the Zenair Zodiac XL. It only took a handful of
crashes, without a single common cause, out of more than 1,000 flying to
"ground" that whole bunch. We have already lost a couple Lightning's with
no common cause.... out of a lot less than 1,000 flying. We really need
Lightning pilots to act wisely, not just for their sake but for the sake of
all of use who love the plane.
7) Not resisting temptation. We all know what it feels like to be buzzing
along on a great day strapped in a fine airplane. A few swerves, turns and
banks feel good and we think she wants to loop, roll or spin. Take a cold
shower first.
FWIW
Doug Koenigsberg
===================================
ttp://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroelectric.com
m/ href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com
"http://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.com
tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
t
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
===================================
ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
===================================
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Bailing out
Probably makes you think you are back in Wisconsin.
Buz
In a message dated 12/5/2009 11:47:53 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
info(at)flylightning.net writes:
I am reading all of this and all good points from all, see the voice has
not had to speak in this case. However I would like to point something out,
It snowed last night here in TN and it is freakin cold!!!
Nick
____________________________________
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, December 05, 2009 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Re: Bailing out
Doug,
Well stated, Doug, and outstanding advise. You remain a sage of down to
earth wisdom. Maybe because of your knowledge that sh*t goes downhill. ;-)
Buz
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:45:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Kayberg(at)aol.com writes:.
This is more of a general response to Bill and others who are considering
trying more aggressive maneuvers in their Lightning's. I am not writing
as an expert in aerobatics. I am using several third party anecdotes.
It is just my mental compilations. It is what I have heard from "hangar
flying"
There seems to be several things that are universal to early attempts at
flying beyond the recommendations of the kit maker.
1) Assumptions that a little experience is enough to handle a Lightning.
That is OK if one is lucky. I have heard of 4 different pilots, at
least 2 were former Air Force jet jockeys (not Buz), who tried a sloppy roll
in a Lightning and ended up going straight down and needed a high G
pullout. The plane saved them because of its strength, but it was not a fun
time.
2) Assumptions that a Lightning is "like" something else, therefore it
reacts the same way. A couple of the previously mention pilots had high
performance aerobatic planes. They still screwed up their first roll.
3) Assuming you wont need to "get out" of the plane if something goes bad.
The best case here is the Cessna BugCatcher (SkyCatcher). On two
separate occasions, during spin testing, two different airplanes became
uncontrollable and ended up crashing. Parachutes saved the pilots, but the point
is that even experienced pilots with an intimate knowledge of a particular
airframe can end up badly..... Do you fly with personal rules? A good
one might be, no aerobatic attempts in a Lightning without A)a canopy release
and a parachute or B) an airframe chute. Which is why I am impressed by
Bill's willingness to raise the issue in the first place.
4) Assuming the plane's response wont be abrupt. If you read Buz's
accounts, you may recall he had a flap problem during testing and the plane
rolled upside down ....faster than even he could respond to. You will also
note to ENTER a spin, it was necessary to pitch the nose up at very high
angles. Same for doing departure stalls. If you work at doing aggressive
stalls, the plane can also respond aggressively. Remember Buz has a lot of
cautions about becoming inverted and entering flat spins.
5) Ignoring the cautions of people who have done aggressive maneuvers.
There is a reason the most experienced and skilled pilots of Lightnings dont
talk about what they can do in a Lightning. They are afraid someone who
overestimates their piloting skills will try it with fatal results. Not
because the airplane is unsafe, but it WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR AEROBATICS!!
6) Not thinking about the effect of their screw up on the "brand". We
know what the Feds just did to the Zenair Zodiac XL. It only took a handful
of crashes, without a single common cause, out of more than 1,000 flying to
"ground" that whole bunch. We have already lost a couple Lightning's
with no common cause.... out of a lot less than 1,000 flying. We really
need Lightning pilots to act wisely, not just for their sake but for the sake
of all of use who love the plane.
7) Not resisting temptation. We all know what it feels like to be buzzing
along on a great day strapped in a fine airplane. A few swerves, turns
and banks feel good and we think she wants to loop, roll or spin. Take a
cold shower first.
FWIW
Doug Koenigsberg
===================================
ttp://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroelectric.com
m/ href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com
"http://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.com
tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
t
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
===================================
ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
===================================
www.aeroelectric.com
www.homebuilthelp.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
(http://www.aeroelectric.com/)
(http://www.buildersbooks.com/)
(http://www.homebuilthelp.com/)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Bailing Out
Brad,
I feel the same way you do that the majority of the 601XL problems
were probably being caused by pilot input. Unfortunately, about four years
ago I had talked our EAA chapter into buying a 601XL kit and building it as a
chapter project. I was the technical counselor on the project and the guy
that made sure it was built according to plans. The building process went
well and all the chapter members involved learned a lot about acceptable
aircraft building standards and reading blueprints, etc. When the airplane
was completed, four guys in the chapter bought it, formed a LLC, and have
put close to 300 hours on it in the last 2 &1/2 years. I made the initial
flights before turning it over to the owners (about 10 hours) and since
then the owners have enjoyed it very much, but have only flown it well inside
the stated performance envelop.
Today the wings are coming off to get ready to accomplish the latest
changes. I don't know how long it will take us to get all those changes
accomplished, but the owners knew that in order to sell it in the future, the
changes needed to be accomplished - not because they were worried about
flying their aircraft.
The point of this message is to let you know I understand what you are
going through. You have probably already invested a lot of time into your
project and now will be starting again. Bummer. But I also want you to
know that looking at all the kits out there, you can't do any better than
the Lightning if "time to build" is anywhere on your decision matrix. It is
absolutely the best airplane out there that can meet the light sport
requirements if that is also a part of your decision process.
So good luck in your hunt for your next project and don't hesitate to
contact me if you have any questions. I probably sound like I am on the
Lighting payroll, but that is not the case. Heck, I don't even own one. I
have flown lots of them and believe in their product and the people that
made it happen. Good friends.
Blue Skies,
Buz
In a message dated 12/5/2009 11:22:53 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
rosestar(at)sonic.net writes:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: Rosalie
Doug's comments are very wise.
I am one of those Zodiac owners. I am parting out my airplane for
specific reasons.
However, some of us pilots are aware of the conditions in which those
airplanes were flown when they crashed...250# over gross, extreme high
speed low pass, aggressive speeds in an airplane at 1200#. These are
pilot issues. The point is that these LSA's are extremely light
aircraft which are advertised to fly at 138 mph. In my opinion that is
WAY over acceptable speeds for the aluminum airframes, and the tube and
fabric airframes. What could have saved lives? Answer: prudent and
conservative flying. These are not aerobatic airplanes. If someone
wants to fly it aggressively, then they risk their own life, but also
impact the future of other owners.
Now...I am on this list because I am contemplating a purchase of a
Lightening for its structural strength. But, I would not consider
aerobatics in it.
("Sad") Brad
former Zodiac builder/pilot.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
In a message dated 12/5/2009 11:42:25 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
rollnloop(at)hotmail.com writes:
I got the attachments---But I could not open them (?)....
Hey Rick, good to hear from you. Hope all is well in northern Virginia.
But one question, are you normally able to open pdf attachments. I am not
a computer guy at all and can't figure WTF is happening?
Blue Skies,
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jack Gonzenbach" <jgonzenbach(at)jegcons.com>
Subject: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Buz,
I got both emails; one with the pdf's attached and one with the docx files.
Both opened fine on my PC. I found earlier that in order to get the
attachments, you have to be on the regular Lightning-List that sends the
emails individually to your email account. If on the daily digest as I was
earlier, or only use the web access to the list, you won't get any
attachments.
Thanks for sharing this info.
Jack
Jack Gonzenbach
_____
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, December 05, 2009 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA
certification
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:14:45 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
EAFerguson(at)aol.com writes:
Did the ASTM Certification require loops or aileron rolls?
No, loops and rolls were not required. Roll response was measured by timing
roll reversals as I recall. I guess I need to go back and read all 25 of
the flight test.
Did you get the attachments that had the spin write ups? Or anyone else? I
am trying to figure out if I need to try some other way to send them.
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: IFLYSMODEL(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
Hey Buz: I got the attachments in the first e-mail, and they opened just
fine without any special programs. But then we are on the same net (AOL) and
my windows program (XP) opened it seamlessly.
Lynn Nelsen
In a message dated 12/5/2009 12:26:47 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
N1BZRich(at)aol.com writes:
In a message dated 12/5/2009 11:42:25 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
rollnloop(at)hotmail.com writes:
I got the attachments---But I could not open them (?)....
Hey Rick, good to hear from you. Hope all is well in northern Virginia.
But one question, are you normally able to open pdf attachments. I am not
a computer guy at all and can't figure WTF is happening?
Blue Skies,
Buz
(http://www.aeroelectric.com/)
(http://www.buildersbooks.com/)
(http://www.homebuilthelp.com/)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
Jack, thanks for the feedback. Now I understand. Hopefully Bill will
read this and know why he didn't see the attachments. I guess I can send
them
directly to his email address.
Buz
In a message dated 12/5/2009 12:36:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jgonzenbach(at)jegcons.com writes:
Buz,
I got both emails; one with the pdf=99s attached and one with the
docx
files. Both opened fine on my PC. I found earlier that in order to get th
e
attachments, you have to be on the regular Lightning-List that sends the
emails
individually to your email account. If on the daily digest as I was
earlier, or only use the web access to the list, you won=99t get an
y attachments.
Thanks for sharing this info.
Jack
Jack Gonzenbach
____________________________________
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of n1bzrich@a
ol.com
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA
certification
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:14:45 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
EAFerguson(at)aol.com writes:
Did the ASTM Certification require loops or aileron rolls?
No, loops and rolls were not required. Roll response was measured by
timing roll reversals as I recall. I guess I need to go back and read al
l 25
of the flight test.
Did you get the attachments that had the spin write ups? Or anyone else?
I am trying to figure out if I need to try some other way to send them.
Buz
-- Please Support Your Lists This Month --
(And Get Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
November is the Annual List Fund Raiser. Click on
this year's Terrific Free Incentive Gifts provided
* AeroElectric _www.aeroelectric.com_ (http://www.aeroelectric.com/)
* The Builder's Bookstore _www.buildersbooks.com_
(http://www.buildersbooks.com/)
* HomebuiltHELP _www.homebuilthelp.com_ (http://www.homebuilthelp.com/
)
List Contribution Web Site:
--> _http://www.matronics.com/contribution_
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
Thank you for your generous support!
-Matt Dralle, List Admin.
- The Lightning-List Email Forum -
--> _http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List_
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List)
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
========================
============
(http://www.aeroelectric.com/)
(http://www.buildersbooks.com/)
(http://www.homebuilthelp.com/)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
========================
============
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List)
========================
============
========================
============
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Rick Bowen <rollnloop(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Buz=2C
Hope you haven't got any snow yet...as of noon here on the Northern Neck=2C
we only have rain.
Course=2C the BAD news is=2C the ground is so saturated=2C my runway has wa
ter standing even with the top of the grass for about the first 500ft of th
e northern end.
I just want a freeze so I can get the plane out of the hangar!
As far as the files=2C yes I normally can open pdf files fine.And as I said
=2C I open most "stuff" just fine.
I AM on my home computer=2C which is light years slower than my work comput
er.And=2C I only have dial-up service here.....
If you don't mind=2C try sending the files directly to me off list=2Cand I
will see what happens.
Stay dry Buz=2C and Merry Christmas to you!!
Rick
From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Date: Sat=2C 5 Dec 2009 12:22:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certific
ation
In a message dated 12/5/2009 11:42:25 A.M. Eastern Standard Time=2C rollnlo
op(at)hotmail.com writes:
I got the attachments---But I could not open them (?)....
Hey Rick=2C good to hear from you. Hope all is well in northern Virginia.
But one question=2C are you normally able to open pdf attachments. I am no
t a computer guy at all and can't figure WTF is happening?
Blue Skies=2C
Buz
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Hotmail is faster and more secure than ever.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/hotmail_bl1/hotmail_bl1.aspx?o
cid=PID23879::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-ww:WM_IMHM_1:092009
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Kayberg(at)aol.com
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Bailing out
In a message dated 12/5/2009 10:57:21 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
bill(at)gdsx.com writes:
Doug:
Good points! I have thought to myself a few times how Nick probably has
his head in his hands saying "No, Bill, control yourself!"
:)
Your description of the bad turnout of the attempted rolls resonates with
me. I have to say I wouldn't think twice about a roll in an RV, but with
the long wingtips the roll rate on the Lightning is just not fast enough for
me to be comfortable with it.
I flew a bunch in a Giles 202 one summer, and the pilot I flew with showed
me how people botch a roll. The lesson stuck with me, even though there
was no risk in the Giles.
Back to the Lightning, my thought was it would be easy to not pull the
nose up enough (or too much!) and botch a roll because of the slower roll
rate, especially if you didn't unload it through inverted.
The plane feels sporty, and that can make it tempting. While I'm sure it
can be done safely, and I'm also sure many have done it, I haven't.
Bill
I have heard the short wing will roll fast enough, dont know of a long wing
being rolled.
I have no real desire to do rolls in a Lightning, so I have no idea how to
do them correctly. The stories of having the nose pointed at the ground
and the airspeed passing 195 tend to deter me.
And thanks for your considerations. Again, I am just hoping people will
do what you have done and give this thing some real thought before just
ramming the stick against the stop.
Doug
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave" <corky(at)hbci.com>
Subject: Re: Autopilot
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Bill
Let me throw this at you --- my altitude also would vary 50 ft in less than
smooth air. My problem was in my bell crank-- too much play on the pivot
bolt-- problem solved after installing proper size bolt and lube.
Esqual stuff
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Strahan" <bill(at)gdsx.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 12:38 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Autopilot
>
> I dorked with my autopilot settings, static system, and all SORTS of crap
> trying to get the dang thing to hold altitude. Mark said "just vent the
> static to the cockpit."
>
> I kept dorking around with it, trying just about everything to fix it. I
> finally gave up two days ago and just did what Mark had been saying a few
> months ago. Mark, feel free to send me one of Hallmark's new "I told you
> so" cards. :)
>
> But the reason I'm posting is that I then kept playing with the settings
> and once I set the Static Lag to 0 with it vented to the cockpit, it held
> altitude very well even in some serious bumps and wind.
>
> Which got me thinking, like any good programmer, to start backing out the
> changes that didn't fix the problem. One of the changes recommended that
> I incorporated originally was to move the autopilot pushrod to the
> innermost hole on the control arm.
>
> Of course, not only does that give the servo more torque to move the
> elevator, it also gives the servo drag more torque to be placed into the
> control system. I like light controls, so after I was certain everything
> was working well I moved the autopilot pushrod to the outermost hole on
> the arm.
>
> Not only could I immediately tell the difference on the ground in less
> servo drag felt when moving full deflection, but I could also tell in the
> air, especially when slow for landing. I was very happy with the change.
>
> And it still held altitude perfectly! (This is another chance Mark, go
> ahead and say it)
>
> So if you have your autopilot altitude hold working, you might try moving
> to the outermost hole on the control arm. Less servo drag, lighter
> controls.
>
> Bill
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=276278#276278
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
From: "JOSEPH MATHIAS LINDA MATHIAS" <lbmathias(at)verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Buz,
I got them twice.
----- Original Message -----
From: n1bzrich(at)aol.com
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 11:24 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA
certification
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:14:45 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
EAFerguson(at)aol.com writes:
Did the ASTM Certification require loops or aileron rolls?
No, loops and rolls were not required. Roll response was measured by
timing roll reversals as I recall. I guess I need to go back and read
all 25 of the flight test.
Did you get the attachments that had the spin write ups? Or anyone
else? I am trying to figure out if I need to try some other way to send
them.
Buz
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
Date: Dec 05, 2009
The .docx files are the ones that I downloaded and work fine. If somebody
has an earlier version than 2007 of Word then these will not work without d
ownloading a plug-in. I got both sets of attachments though. I don't thin
k those attachments will show up unless you are on the actual email list.
Brian W.
From: jgonzenbach(at)jegcons.com
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Spin test profiles for Lightning SLSA certific
ation
Date: Sat=2C 5 Dec 2009 11:32:43 -0600
Buz=2C
I got both emails=3B one with the pdf=92s attached and one with the docx
files. Both opened fine on my PC. I found earlier that in order to get the
attachments=2C
you have to be on the regular Lightning-List that sends the emails individu
ally
to your email account. If on the daily digest as I was earlier=2C or only u
se the
web access to the list=2C you won=92t get any attachments.
Thanks for sharing this info.
Jack
Jack Gonzenbach
From:
owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of n1bzrich@ao
l.com
Sent: Saturday=2C December 05=2C 2009
10:25 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Spin
test profiles for Lightning SLSA certification
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:14:45 A.M.
Eastern Standard Time=2C EAFerguson(at)aol.com writes:
Did the ASTM Certification require
loops or aileron rolls?
No=2C loops and rolls were not
required. Roll response was measured by timing roll reversals as I
recall. I guess I need to go back and read all 25 of the flight
test.
Did you get the attachments that had the
spin write ups? Or anyone else? I am trying to figure out if I need
to try some other way to send them.
Buz
-- Please Support Your Lists This Month -- (And Get Some
AWESOME FREE Gifts!)November is the Annual List Fund Raiser. Click on th
is year's Terrific Free Incentive Gifts provided * AeroElectric www.aer
oelectric.com * The Builder's Bookstore www.buildersbooks.com * Home
builtHELP www.homebuilthelp.comList Contribution Web Site:--> http://www.ma
tronics.com/contributionThank you for your generous support!
-Matt Dralle=2C List Admin. - The Lightning-List Em
ail Forum ---> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with Messenger straight from your Hotmail inbox.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/hotmail_bl1/hotmail_bl1.aspx?o
cid=PID23879::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-ww:WM_IMHM_4:092009
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Bailing out
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Nick=2C *sigh* I miss living there. When we moved to Houston we were tol
d that it snows like once every 10-20 years. This is my third year down he
re and it's snowed three times. The latest was yesterday=2C from about 8am
-6pm. Of course two or three weeks ago we were high 80's so nothing stuck
=2C but then the temp dropped to 26 last night and probably caused some sli
ck spots. Next month I'm flying a Stearman and trying to figure out how to
keep from freezing with an 80mph wind in my face all the time. I imagine
it'll probably be similar to riding a motorcycle in the middle of winter.
Stay warm up there=2C Brian W.
From: info(at)flylightning.net
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Re: Bailing out
Date: Sat=2C 5 Dec 2009 10:44:56 -0600
I am reading all of this and all good
points from all=2C see the voice has not had to speak in this case. However
I would
like to point something out=2C
It
snowed last night here in TN and it is freakin cold!!!
Nick
From:
owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-serv
er(at)matronics.com]
On Behalf Of n1bzrich(at)aol.com
Sent: Saturday=2C December 05=2C 2009
10:30 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Re:
Bailing out
Doug=2C
Well stated=2C
Doug=2C and outstanding advise. You remain a sage of down to earth
wisdom. Maybe because of your knowledge that sh*t goes downhill.
=3B-)
Buz
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:45:05 A.M.
Eastern Standard Time=2C Kayberg(at)aol.com writes:.
This is more of a general response to
Bill and others who are considering trying more aggressive maneuvers in
their Lightning's. I am not writing as an expert in
aerobatics. I am using several third party anecdotes.
It is just my mental compilations. It is what I have heard from
"hangar flying"
There seems to be several things that are
universal to early attempts at flying beyond the recommendations of the kit
maker.
1) Assumptions that a little
experience is enough to handle a Lightning. That is OK if one is
lucky. I have heard of 4 different pilots=2C at least 2 were former
Air Force jet jockeys (not Buz)=2C who tried a sloppy roll in a
Lightning and ended up going straight down and needed a high G pullout.
The plane saved them because of its strength=2C but it was not a fun time.
2) Assumptions that a Lightning is
"like" something else=2C therefore it reacts the same
way. A couple of the previously mention pilots had high
performance aerobatic planes. They still screwed up their first
roll.
3) Assuming you wont need to
"get out" of the plane if something goes bad. The best case
here is the Cessna BugCatcher (SkyCatcher). On two separate
occasions=2C during spin testing=2C two different airplanes became
uncontrollable and ended up crashing. Parachutes saved the pilots=2C
but the point is that even experienced pilots with an intimate knowledge of
a
particular airframe can end up badly..... Do you fly with personal
rules? A good one might be=2C no aerobatic attempts in a
Lightning without A)a canopy release and a parachute or B) an airframe
chute. Which is why I am impressed by Bill's willingness to raise
the issue in the first place.
4) Assuming the plane's response
wont be abrupt. If you read Buz's accounts=2C you may recall he had a flap
problem during testing and the plane rolled upside down ....faster than
even he could respond to. You will also note to ENTER a
spin=2C it was necessary to pitch the nose up at very high angles.
Same for doing departure stalls. If you work at doing aggressive
stalls=2C the plane can also respond aggressively. Remember Buz has a
lot of cautions about becoming inverted and entering flat spins.
5) Ignoring the cautions of people who
have done aggressive maneuvers. There is a reason the most experienced
and skilled pilots of Lightnings dont talk about what they can do in a
Lightning. They are afraid someone who overestimates their piloting
skills will try it with fatal results. Not because the airplane is
unsafe=2C but it WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR AEROBATICS!!
6) Not thinking about the effect of their
screw up on the "brand". We know what the Feds just did
to the Zenair Zodiac XL. It only took a handful of crashes=2C without a
single common cause=2C out of more than 1=2C000 flying to "ground" that who
le
bunch. We have already lost a couple Lightning's with no common
cause.... out of a lot less than 1=2C000 flying. We really need
Lightning pilots to act wisely=2C not just for their sake but for the sake
of all of use who love the plane.
7) Not resisting temptation. We all
know what it feels like to be buzzing along on a great day strapped
in a fine airplane. A few swerves=2C turns and banks feel good
and we think she wants to loop=2C roll or spin. Take a cold shower first.
FWIW
Doug Koenigsberg
========================
============ttp://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroel
ectric.comm/ href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com"h
ttp://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.comtp://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution========
===t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http:
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List==========
=ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com========
===
www.aeroelectric.comwww.homebuilthelp.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contrib
ution
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Hotmail is faster and more secure than ever.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/hotmail_bl1/hotmail_bl1.aspx?o
cid=PID23879::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-ww:WM_IMHM_1:092009
________________________________________________________________________________
From: Brian Whittingham <dashvii(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Bailing out
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Nick=2C *sigh* I miss living there. When we moved to Houston we were tol
d that it snows like once every 10-20 years. This is my third year down he
re and it's snowed three times. The latest was yesterday=2C from about 8am
-6pm. Of course two or three weeks ago we were high 80's so nothing stuck
=2C but then the temp dropped to 26 last night and probably caused some sli
ck spots. Next month I'm flying a Stearman and trying to figure out how to
keep from freezing with an 80mph wind in my face all the time. I imagine
it'll probably be similar to riding a motorcycle in the middle of winter.
Stay warm up there=2C Brian W.
From: info(at)flylightning.net
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Re: Bailing out
Date: Sat=2C 5 Dec 2009 10:44:56 -0600
I am reading all of this and all good
points from all=2C see the voice has not had to speak in this case. However
I would
like to point something out=2C
It
snowed last night here in TN and it is freakin cold!!!
Nick
From:
owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-serv
er(at)matronics.com]
On Behalf Of n1bzrich(at)aol.com
Sent: Saturday=2C December 05=2C 2009
10:30 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Re:
Bailing out
Doug=2C
Well stated=2C
Doug=2C and outstanding advise. You remain a sage of down to earth
wisdom. Maybe because of your knowledge that sh*t goes downhill.
=3B-)
Buz
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:45:05 A.M.
Eastern Standard Time=2C Kayberg(at)aol.com writes:.
This is more of a general response to
Bill and others who are considering trying more aggressive maneuvers in
their Lightning's. I am not writing as an expert in
aerobatics. I am using several third party anecdotes.
It is just my mental compilations. It is what I have heard from
"hangar flying"
There seems to be several things that are
universal to early attempts at flying beyond the recommendations of the kit
maker.
1) Assumptions that a little
experience is enough to handle a Lightning. That is OK if one is
lucky. I have heard of 4 different pilots=2C at least 2 were former
Air Force jet jockeys (not Buz)=2C who tried a sloppy roll in a
Lightning and ended up going straight down and needed a high G pullout.
The plane saved them because of its strength=2C but it was not a fun time.
2) Assumptions that a Lightning is
"like" something else=2C therefore it reacts the same
way. A couple of the previously mention pilots had high
performance aerobatic planes. They still screwed up their first
roll.
3) Assuming you wont need to
"get out" of the plane if something goes bad. The best case
here is the Cessna BugCatcher (SkyCatcher). On two separate
occasions=2C during spin testing=2C two different airplanes became
uncontrollable and ended up crashing. Parachutes saved the pilots=2C
but the point is that even experienced pilots with an intimate knowledge of
a
particular airframe can end up badly..... Do you fly with personal
rules? A good one might be=2C no aerobatic attempts in a
Lightning without A)a canopy release and a parachute or B) an airframe
chute. Which is why I am impressed by Bill's willingness to raise
the issue in the first place.
4) Assuming the plane's response
wont be abrupt. If you read Buz's accounts=2C you may recall he had a flap
problem during testing and the plane rolled upside down ....faster than
even he could respond to. You will also note to ENTER a
spin=2C it was necessary to pitch the nose up at very high angles.
Same for doing departure stalls. If you work at doing aggressive
stalls=2C the plane can also respond aggressively. Remember Buz has a
lot of cautions about becoming inverted and entering flat spins.
5) Ignoring the cautions of people who
have done aggressive maneuvers. There is a reason the most experienced
and skilled pilots of Lightnings dont talk about what they can do in a
Lightning. They are afraid someone who overestimates their piloting
skills will try it with fatal results. Not because the airplane is
unsafe=2C but it WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR AEROBATICS!!
6) Not thinking about the effect of their
screw up on the "brand". We know what the Feds just did
to the Zenair Zodiac XL. It only took a handful of crashes=2C without a
single common cause=2C out of more than 1=2C000 flying to "ground" that who
le
bunch. We have already lost a couple Lightning's with no common
cause.... out of a lot less than 1=2C000 flying. We really need
Lightning pilots to act wisely=2C not just for their sake but for the sake
of all of use who love the plane.
7) Not resisting temptation. We all
know what it feels like to be buzzing along on a great day strapped
in a fine airplane. A few swerves=2C turns and banks feel good
and we think she wants to loop=2C roll or spin. Take a cold shower first.
FWIW
Doug Koenigsberg
========================
============ttp://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroel
ectric.comm/ href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com"h
ttp://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.comtp://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution========
===t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http:
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List==========
=ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com========
===
www.aeroelectric.comwww.homebuilthelp.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contrib
ution
_________________________________________________________________
Windows 7: Unclutter your desktop. Learn more.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windows-7/videos-tours.aspx?h=7sec&slide
id=1&media=aero-shake-7second&listid=1&stop=1&ocid=PID24727::T:WL
MTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_7secdemo:122009
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 05, 2009
Subject: Re: Bailing out
From: Maxim Voronin <voroninmax(at)gmail.com>
Just drove from the Door County, WI yesterday. Pretty nice up there and no
snow. Chicago on the other hand is freezing cold. Oh, and snow everywhere.
Go figure.
Max
On Dec 5, 2009 1:32 PM, "Brian Whittingham" wrote:
Nick,
*sigh* I miss living there. When we moved to Houston we were told that
it snows like once every 10-20 years. This is my third year down here and
it's snowed three times. The latest was yesterday, from about 8am-6pm. Of
course two or three weeks ago we were high 80's so nothing stuck, but then
the temp dropped to 26 last night and probably caused some slick spots.
Next month I'm flying a Stearman and trying to figure out how to keep from
freezing with an 80mph wind in my face all the time. I imagine it'll
probably be similar to riding a motorcycle in the middle of winter. Stay
warm up there, Brian W.
------------------------------
From: info(at)flylightning.net
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Re: Bailing out
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 10:44:56 -0600
I am reading all of this and all good points from all, see the voice has
not had to speak in this case. However I would like to point something out,
*It snowed last night here in TN and it is freakin cold!!!*
* *
Nick
------------------------------
*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, December 05, 2009 10:30 AM
out
Doug,
Well stated, Doug, and outstanding advise. You remain a sage of down to
earth wisdom. Maybe because of your knowledge that sh*t goes downhill. ;-)
Buz
In a message dated 12/5/2009 9:45:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Kayberg(at)aol.com writes:.
> > This is more of a general response to Bill and others who are
considering trying more aggressiv...
*===========*
*ttp://www.aeroelectric.com/">www.aeroelectric.com*
*m/ href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersbooks.com*
*"http://www.homebuilthelp.com/">www.homebuilthelp.com*
*tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
*====================================*
*t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List*
*====================================*
*ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com*
*====================================*
* *
* *
* *
**
**
**
*www.aeroelectric.com*
*www.homebuilthelp.com*
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
*
ectric.com
">www.buildersbooks.combuilthelp.comww.matronics.com/contribution
st">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-Listonics.com
*
------------------------------
Windows LiveT Hotmail is faster and more secure than ever. Learn
more.<http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/hotmail_bl1/hotmail_bl1.aspx?ocid=PID23879::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-ww:WM_IMHM_1:092009>
Please Support You...
________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Dec 05, 2009
From: Rosalie <rosestar(at)sonic.net>
Subject: Re: Bailing Out
Buz,
I really appreciate the response. Thank you.
Brad
N1BZRich(at)aol.com wrote:
> Brad,
> I feel the same way you do that the majority of the 601XL problems
> were probably being caused by pilot input. Unfortunately, about four
> years ago I had talked our EAA chapter into buying a 601XL kit and
> building it as a chapter project. I was the technical counselor on
> the project and the guy that made sure it was built according to
> plans. The building process went well and all the chapter members
> involved learned a lot about acceptable aircraft building standards
> and reading blueprints, etc. When the airplane was completed, four
> guys in the chapter bought it, formed a LLC, and have put close to 300
> hours on it in the last 2 &1/2 years. I made the initial flights
> before turning it over to the owners (about 10 hours) and since then
> the owners have enjoyed it very much, but have only flown it well
> inside the stated performance envelop.
> Today the wings are coming off to get ready to accomplish the
> latest changes. I don't know how long it will take us to get all
> those changes accomplished, but the owners knew that in order to sell
> it in the future, the changes needed to be accomplished - not because
> they were worried about flying their aircraft.
> The point of this message is to let you know I understand what you
> are going through. You have probably already invested a lot of time
> into your project and now will be starting again. Bummer. But I also
> want you to know that looking at all the kits out there, you can't do
> any better than the Lightning if "time to build" is anywhere on your
> decision matrix. It is absolutely the best airplane out there that
> can meet the light sport requirements if that is also a part of your
> decision process.
> So good luck in your hunt for your next project and don't hesitate
> to contact me if you have any questions. I probably sound like I am
> on the Lighting payroll, but that is not the case. Heck, I don't even
> own one. I have flown lots of them and believe in their product and
> the people that made it happen. Good friends.
> Blue Skies,
> Buz
>
> In a message dated 12/5/2009 11:22:53 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> rosestar(at)sonic.net writes:
>
>
> Doug's comments are very wise.
>
> I am one of those Zodiac owners. I am parting out my airplane for
> specific reasons.
>
> However, some of us pilots are aware of the conditions in which those
> airplanes were flown when they crashed...250# over gross, extreme
> high
> speed low pass, aggressive speeds in an airplane at 1200#. These are
> pilot issues. The point is that these LSA's are extremely light
> aircraft which are advertised to fly at 138 mph. In my opinion
> that is
> WAY over acceptable speeds for the aluminum airframes, and the
> tube and
> fabric airframes. What could have saved lives? Answer: prudent and
> conservative flying. These are not aerobatic airplanes. If someone
> wants to fly it aggressively, then they risk their own life, but also
> impact the future of other owners.