Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:03 AM - Re: Outrigger Wheel Fork (Dave Disney)
2. 04:18 AM - Re: Rough River, KY Fly In (h&jeuropa)
3. 05:42 AM - Re: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length (nigel_graham@m-tecque.co.uk)
4. 06:22 AM - Re: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length (GRAHAM SINGLETON)
5. 06:27 AM - Re: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length (Ivan Shaw)
6. 06:28 AM - Re: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length (nigel_graham@m-tecque.co.uk)
7. 06:30 AM - Re: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length (GRAHAM SINGLETON)
8. 09:05 AM - Re: Re: Rough River, KY Fly In (Kevin Klinefelter)
9. 12:04 PM - Re: Re: Rough River, KY Fly In (Jerry Rehn)
10. 02:39 PM - Re: Re: Rough River, KY Fly In (Greg Fuchs)
11. 03:08 PM - Re: Old Classic needs upgrade to 912S 100hp (jonathanmilbank)
12. 03:08 PM - Re: Re: Rough River, KY Fly In (Fred Klein)
13. 03:57 PM - Re: Re: Rough River, KY Fly In (Kevin Klinefelter)
14. 11:37 PM - Re: Re: Old Classic needs upgrade to 912S 100hp (Pete Lawless)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Outrigger Wheel Fork |
Hi Dave,
I don't have any spares, but I know where you are coming from re speed control,flaring
and keeping straight. I'm about four hours into conversion training at
Gloucester in my new steed and wondering if I'll ever get the hang of it. We
have certainly had some 'entertaining' landings and some 'interesting' take offs
as well. I intend keeping faith with the mono though, if others can fly them
then so can I (hopefully).
Best of luck with your search, maybe I should get some spares in as well, just
in case!!
Dave Disney
G-RJWX
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405697#405697
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rough River, KY Fly In |
Sounds like this weekend doesn't work for most people & Rough River is booked the
rest of Sept / Oct. No one has booked yet, so we think we should release the
rooms.
Any suggestions for a different location & weekend?
There's been a suggestion of Oct 12-13 in Dayton area. We've never been, but the
website for Ocracoke, NC looks nice...
Jim & Heather
N241BW
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405699#405699
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length |
A fascinating insight into the reasoning behind the recommendation for
the optimum flap setting can be found on page three of this early
factory newsletter, dated March 1994.
This did of course relate to the first prototype, G-YURO, which was
powered by the 80 horse 912 driving a fixed pitch Warp Drive prop.
Happy days. The enthusiasm and excitement was palpable. Isn't it time
somebody developed a new homebuild?
Nigel
On 30/07/2013 10:23, Frans Veldman wrote:
>
> On 07/29/2013 11:25 AM, GRAHAM SINGLETON wrote:
>
>> don't use 30 degree flap, Europa tested it and found you are starting to
>> lose aileron control at the low speeds achieved in ground effect.
> I have some trouble believing this (and even when it is true it is
> questionable whether this is still a valid reason for the XS with the
> increased aileron span and with more powerfull engines).
>
> With higher flap settings you are getting more drag than additional
> lift. With 10% more flap (30 degree instead of 27) you will get maybe
> just 5% more lift. If the ailerons are inadequate for this tiny bit of
> extra lift I think they would have difficulties handling 27 degrees as
> well. Furthermore, in the XS the ailerons are substantially increased in
> lenght, significantly more than 5%, and should have much more control
> power at low speeds! Even if control problems were the limiting factor,
> than it is questionable whether the same limit would still be needed for
> the XS.
>
> I thought that the limitation in flap was because of the 80hp engine
> used for the certification, which might have lacked sufficient power to
> exercise a go around with full flaps under full load (which is, if I
> remember correctly, a certification requirement. For the same reason the
> older Cessna's have 40 degree flaps, where the newer ones have 30 degree
> which was instantly rewarded with a 30Kg higher MTOW without any
> structural changes).
>
> Furthermore, in the tri gear the fact that you have the option to use 30
> degree flaps doesn't mean that you will have to use this all the time.
> There are situations where more flap would be welcome, and there might
> be situations where using less flap would be better. I can't see the
> benefit of the 26 degree limit. Of course for the mono you have no other
> option than to land with full flaps, so maybe in this case the
> limitation is justified.
>
> I know folks having drilled a new hole in the lugs on the flap control
> tube, so that the actuator can drive the flap further (and faster). No
> control difficulties are observed even in quite a few nasty situations
> with 30 knots wind and lots of turbulence. Instead the short field
> capabilities are somewhat improved.
>
> Regards,
> Frans
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length |
Thanks for that Nigel=0AAs you say, fascinating! I'm glad my memory is not
so innacuarate after all!=0AGraham=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A__________________________
______=0A From: "nigel_graham@m-tecque.co.uk" <nigel_graham@m-tecque.co.uk>
=0ATo: europa-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Wednesday, 31 July 2013, 13:42=0A
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length=0A =0A=0AA f
ascinating insight into the reasoning behind the recommendation for =0Athe
optimum flap setting can be found on page three of this early =0Afactory ne
wsletter, dated March 1994.=0AThis did of course relate to the first protot
ype, G-YURO, which was =0Apowered by the 80 horse 912 driving a fixed pitch
Warp Drive prop.=0A=0AHappy days. The enthusiasm and excitement was palpab
le.- Isn't it time =0Asomebody developed a new homebuild?=0A=0ANigel=0A
=0A=0A=0AOn 30/07/2013 10:23, Frans Veldman wrote:=0A> --> Europa-List mess
age posted by: Frans Veldman <frans@privatepilots.nl>=0A>=0A> On 07/29/2013
11:25 AM, GRAHAM SINGLETON wrote:=0A>=0A>> don't use 30 degree flap, Europ
a tested it and found you are starting to=0A>> lose aileron control at the
low speeds achieved in ground effect.=0A> I have some trouble believing thi
s (and even when it is true it is=0A> questionable whether this is still a
valid reason for the XS with the=0A> increased aileron span and with more p
owerfull engines).=0A>=0A> With higher flap settings you are getting more d
rag than additional=0A> lift. With 10% more flap (30 degree instead of 27)
you will get maybe=0A> just 5% more lift. If the ailerons are inadequate fo
r this tiny bit of=0A> extra lift I think they would have difficulties hand
ling 27 degrees as=0A> well. Furthermore, in the XS the ailerons are substa
ntially increased in=0A> lenght, significantly more than 5%, and should hav
e much more control=0A> power at low speeds! Even if control problems were
the limiting factor,=0A> than it is questionable whether the same limit wou
ld still be needed for=0A> the XS.=0A>=0A> I thought that the limitation in
flap was because of the 80hp engine=0A> used for the certification, which
might have lacked sufficient power to=0A> exercise a go around with full fl
aps under full load (which is, if I=0A> remember correctly, a certification
requirement. For the same reason the=0A> older Cessna's have 40 degree fla
ps, where the newer ones have 30 degree=0A> which was instantly rewarded wi
th a 30Kg higher MTOW without any=0A> structural changes).=0A>=0A> Furtherm
ore, in the tri gear the fact that you have the option to use 30=0A> degree
flaps doesn't mean that you will have to use this all the time.=0A> There
are situations where more flap would be welcome, and there might=0A> be sit
uations where using less flap would be better. I can't see the=0A> benefit
of the 26 degree limit. Of course for the mono you have no other=0A> option
than to land with full flaps, so maybe in this case the=0A> limitation is
justified.=0A>=0A> I know folks having drilled a new hole in the lugs on th
e flap control=0A> tube, so that the actuator can drive the flap further (a
nd faster). No=0A> control difficulties are observed even in quite a few na
sty situations=0A> with 30 knots wind and lots of turbulence. Instead the s
hort field=0A> capabilities are somewhat improved.=0A>=0A> Regards,=0A> Fra
ns=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length |
Looks like mine is!!
Ivan
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of GRAHAM
SINGLETON
Sent: 31 July 2013 14:22
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length
Thanks for that Nigel
As you say, fascinating! I'm glad my memory is not so innacuarate after all!
Graham
_____
From: "nigel_graham@m-tecque.co.uk" <nigel_graham@m-tecque.co.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, 31 July 2013, 13:42
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length
A fascinating insight into the reasoning behind the recommendation for
the optimum flap setting can be found on page three of this early
factory newsletter, dated March 1994.
This did of course relate to the first prototype, G-YURO, which was
powered by the 80 horse 912 driving a fixed pitch Warp Drive prop.
Happy days. The enthusiasm and excitement was palpable. Isn't it time
somebody developed a new homebuild?
Nigel
On 30/07/2013 10:23, Frans Veldman wrote:
>
> On 07/29/2013 11:25 AM, GRAHAM SINGLETON wrote:
>
>> don't use 30 degree flap, Europa tested it and found you are starting to
>> lose aileron control at the low speeds achieved in ground effect.
> I have some trouble believing this (and even when it is true it is
> questionable whether this is still a valid reason for the XS with the
> increased aileron span and with more powerfull engines).
>
> With higher flap settings you are getting more drag than additional
> lift. With 10% more flap (30 degree instead of 27) you will get maybe
> just 5% more lift. If the ailerons are inadequate for this tiny bit of
> extra lift I think they would have difficulties handling 27 degrees as
> well. Furthermore, in the XS the ailerons are substantially increased in
> lenght, significantly more than 5%, and should have much more control
> power at low speeds! Even if control problems were the limiting factor,
> than it is questionable whether the same limit would still be needed for
> the XS.
>
> I thought that the limitation in flap was because of the 80hp engine
> used for the certification, which might have lacked sufficient power to
> exercise a go around with full flaps under full load (which is, if I
> remember correctly, a certification requirement. For the same reason the
> older Cessna's have 40 degree flaps, where the newer ones have 30 degree
> which was instantly rewarded with a 30Kg higher MTOW without any
> structural changes).
>
> Furthermore, in the tri gear the fact that you have the option to use 30
> degree flaps doesn't mean that you will have to use this all the time.
> There are situations where more flap would be welcome, and there might
> be situations where using less flap would be better. I can't see the
> benefit of the 26 degree limit. Of course for the mono you have no other
> option than to land with full flaps, so maybe in this case the
> limitation is justified.
>
> I know folks having drilled a new hole in the lugs on the flap control
> tube, so that the actuator can drive the flap further (and faster). No
> control difficulties are observed even in quite a few nasty situations
> with 30 knots wind and lots of turbulence. Instead the short field
> capabilities are somewhat improved.
>
> Regards,
> Frans
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length |
I felt you needed a bit of support ;-)
N
On 31/07/2013 14:22, GRAHAM SINGLETON wrote:
> Thanks for that Nigel
> As you say, fascinating! I'm glad my memory is not so innacuarate
> after all!
> Graham
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* "nigel_graham@m-tecque.co.uk" <nigel_graham@m-tecque.co.uk>
> *To:* europa-list@matronics.com
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 31 July 2013, 13:42
> *Subject:* Re: Europa-List: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length
>
> A fascinating insight into the reasoning behind the recommendation for
> the optimum flap setting can be found on page three of this early
> factory newsletter, dated March 1994.
> This did of course relate to the first prototype, G-YURO, which was
> powered by the 80 horse 912 driving a fixed pitch Warp Drive prop.
>
> Happy days. The enthusiasm and excitement was palpable. Isn't it time
> somebody developed a new homebuild?
>
> Nigel
>
>
> On 30/07/2013 10:23, Frans Veldman wrote:
> <frans@privatepilots.nl <mailto:frans@privatepilots.nl>>
> >
> > On 07/29/2013 11:25 AM, GRAHAM SINGLETON wrote:
> >
> >> don't use 30 degree flap, Europa tested it and found you are
> starting to
> >> lose aileron control at the low speeds achieved in ground effect.
> > I have some trouble believing this (and even when it is true it is
> > questionable whether this is still a valid reason for the XS with the
> > increased aileron span and with more powerfull engines).
> >
> > With higher flap settings you are getting more drag than additional
> > lift. With 10% more flap (30 degree instead of 27) you will get maybe
> > just 5% more lift. If the ailerons are inadequate for this tiny bit of
> > extra lift I think they would have difficulties handling 27 degrees as
> > well. Furthermore, in the XS the ailerons are substantially increased in
> > lenght, significantly more than 5%, and should have much more control
> > power at low speeds! Even if control problems were the limiting factor,
> > than it is questionable whether the same limit would still be needed for
> > the XS.
> >
> > I thought that the limitation in flap was because of the 80hp engine
> > used for the certification, which might have lacked sufficient power to
> > exercise a go around with full flaps under full load (which is, if I
> > remember correctly, a certification requirement. For the same reason the
> > older Cessna's have 40 degree flaps, where the newer ones have 30 degree
> > which was instantly rewarded with a 30Kg higher MTOW without any
> > structural changes).
> >
> > Furthermore, in the tri gear the fact that you have the option to use 30
> > degree flaps doesn't mean that you will have to use this all the time.
> > There are situations where more flap would be welcome, and there might
> > be situations where using less flap would be better. I can't see the
> > benefit of the 26 degree limit. Of course for the mono you have no other
> > option than to land with full flaps, so maybe in this case the
> > limitation is justified.
> >
> > I know folks having drilled a new hole in the lugs on the flap control
> > tube, so that the actuator can drive the flap further (and faster). No
> > control difficulties are observed even in quite a few nasty situations
> > with 30 knots wind and lots of turbulence. Instead the short field
> > capabilities are somewhat improved.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Frans
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length |
Old age I guess! {{;-) now you know how I feel!=0AG=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A_________
_______________________=0A From: Ivan Shaw <ivanshaw@btinternet.com>=0ATo:
europa-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Wednesday, 31 July 2013, 14:27=0ASubject
: RE: Europa-List: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length=0A =0A=0A=0ALooks l
ike mine is!!=0A-=0AIvan=0A-=0AFrom:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.
com [mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of GRAHAM SIN
GLETON=0ASent: 31 July 2013 14:22=0ATo: europa-list@matronics.com=0ASubject
: Re: Europa-List: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length=0A-=0AThanks for
that Nigel=0AAs you say, fascinating! I'm glad my memory is not so innacuar
ate after all!=0AGraham=0A-=0A=0A________________________________=0A=0AFr
om:"nigel_graham@m-tecque.co.uk" <nigel_graham@m-tecque.co.uk>=0ATo: europa
-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Wednesday, 31 July 2013, 13:42=0ASubject: Re:
Europa-List: Tri-gear Flap Cross Tube Slot Length=0A=0AA fascinating insigh
t into the reasoning behind the recommendation for =0Athe optimum flap sett
ing can be found on page three of this early =0Afactory newsletter, dated M
arch 1994.=0AThis did of course relate to the first prototype, G-YURO, whic
h was =0Apowered by the 80 horse 912 driving a fixed pitch Warp Drive prop.
=0A=0AHappy days. The enthusiasm and excitement was palpable.- Isn't it t
ime =0Asomebody developed a new homebuild?=0A=0ANigel=0A=0A=0A=0AOn 30/07/2
s Veldman <frans@privatepilots.nl>=0A>=0A> On 07/29/2013 11:25 AM, GRAHAM S
INGLETON wrote:=0A>=0A>> don't use 30 degree flap, Europa tested it and fou
nd you are starting to=0A>> lose aileron control at the low speeds achieved
in ground effect.=0A> I have some trouble believing this (and even when it
is true it is=0A> questionable whether this is still a valid reason for th
e XS with the=0A> increased aileron span and with more powerfull engines).
=0A>=0A> With higher flap settings you are getting more drag than additiona
l=0A> lift. With 10% more flap (30 degree instead of 27) you will get maybe
=0A> just 5% more lift. If the ailerons are inadequate for this tiny bit of
=0A> extra lift I think they would have difficulties handling 27 degrees as
=0A> well. Furthermore, in the XS the ailerons are substantially increased
in=0A> lenght, significantly more than 5%, and should have much more contro
l=0A> power at low speeds! Even if control problems were the limiting facto
r,=0A> than it is questionable whether the same limit would still be needed
for=0A> the XS.=0A>=0A> I thought that the limitation in flap was because
of the 80hp engine=0A> used for the certification, which might have lacked
sufficient power to=0A> exercise a go around with full flaps under full loa
d (which is, if I=0A> remember correctly, a certification requirement. For
the same reason the=0A> older Cessna's have 40 degree flaps, where the newe
r ones have 30 degree=0A> which was instantly rewarded with a 30Kg higher M
TOW without any=0A> structural changes).=0A>=0A> Furthermore, in the tri ge
ar the fact that you have the option to use 30=0A> degree flaps doesn't mea
n that you will have to use this all the time.=0A> There are situations whe
re more flap would be welcome, and there might=0A> be situations where usin
g less flap would be better. I can't see the=0A> benefit of the 26 degree l
imit. Of course for the mono you have no other=0A> option than to land with
full flaps, so maybe in this case the=0A> limitation is justified.=0A>=0A>
I know folks having drilled a new hole in the lugs on the flap control=0A>
tube, so that the actuator can drive the flap further (and faster). No=0A>
control difficulties are observed even in quite a few nasty situations=0A>
with 30 knots wind and lots of turbulence. Instead the short field=0A> cap
abilities are somewhat improved.=0A>=0A> Regards,=0A> Frans=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>
=0A>=0A>=0A=0A=0A=0A-=0A-=0Ahttp://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-L
ist=0Ahttp://forums.matronics.com=0Ahttp://www.matronics.com/contribution
===============
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rough River, KY Fly In |
I think we should gather out west sometime! Would anyone be interested?
Kevin in CA
On Jul 31, 2013, at 5:18 AM, "h&jeuropa" <butcher43@att.net> wrote:
>
> Sounds like this weekend doesn't work for most people & Rough River is booked
the rest of Sept / Oct. No one has booked yet, so we think we should release
the rooms.
>
> Any suggestions for a different location & weekend?
>
> There's been a suggestion of Oct 12-13 in Dayton area. We've never been, but
the website for Ocracoke, NC looks nice...
>
> Jim & Heather
> N241BW
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405699#405699
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rough River, KY Fly In |
Works for me
Jerry in Washington
Sent from Iphone
On Jul 31, 2013, at 11:04 AM, Kevin Klinefelter <klinefelter.kevin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think we should gather out west sometime! Would anyone be interested?
> Kevin in CA
>
> On Jul 31, 2013, at 5:18 AM, "h&jeuropa" <butcher43@att.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> Sounds like this weekend doesn't work for most people & Rough River is booked
the rest of Sept / Oct. No one has booked yet, so we think we should release
the rooms.
>>
>> Any suggestions for a different location & weekend?
>>
>> There's been a suggestion of Oct 12-13 in Dayton area. We've never been, but
the website for Ocracoke, NC looks nice...
>>
>> Jim & Heather
>> N241BW
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405699#405699
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rough River, KY Fly In |
Thumbs up!
Greg - OREGON
>
> I think we should gather out west sometime! Would anyone be interested?
> Kevin in CA
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Old Classic needs upgrade to 912S 100hp |
Hi Pete,
Short of going out to the runway with tape measures and stopwatches,
our comparisons are likely to be rather subjective.
Twice in the last couple of months since fitting the new undercarriage, we have
experienced trying to take off on grass with half fuel, little/no headwind and
a pilot plus one "fat bastard" passenger. It wasn't fun!
So the real comparison will be made after fitting the new engine and propeller
blades and trying to take off again in similar circumstances.
I'll try to remember to let you know after completing the conversion, which won't
be for several months.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405745#405745
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rough River, KY Fly In |
We could meet under one of the wings of the Spruce Goose at McMinnville!
On Jul 31, 2013, at 2:39 PM, Greg Fuchs wrote:
>
>
> Thumbs up!
> Greg - OREGON
>
>>
>> I think we should gather out west sometime! Would anyone be interested?
>> Kevin in CA
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Rough River, KY Fly In |
Hey! That sounds good Fred.
Kevin
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 31, 2013, at 4:08 PM, Fred Klein <fklein@orcasonline.com> wrote:
>
> We could meet under one of the wings of the Spruce Goose at McMinnville!
>
> On Jul 31, 2013, at 2:39 PM, Greg Fuchs wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Thumbs up!
>> Greg - OREGON
>>
>>>
>>> I think we should gather out west sometime! Would anyone be interested?
>>> Kevin in CA
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Old Classic needs upgrade to 912S 100hp |
Thanks Jonathan
So sounds like you have gone trigear? The conditions (and passenger!) you
describe are exactly when my mono feels under powered. Mostly from my home
strip I am solo so it is not a problem.
In all cases as soon as the gear/flaps are in there is a really good rate of
climb.
Pete
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of jonathanmilbank
Sent: 31 July 2013 23:08
Subject: Europa-List: Re: Old Classic needs upgrade to 912S 100hp
Hi Pete,
Short of going out to the runway with tape measures and stopwatches,
our comparisons are likely to be rather subjective.
Twice in the last couple of months since fitting the new undercarriage, we
have experienced trying to take off on grass with half fuel, little/no
headwind and a pilot plus one "fat bastard" passenger. It wasn't fun!
So the real comparison will be made after fitting the new engine and
propeller blades and trying to take off again in similar circumstances.
I'll try to remember to let you know after completing the conversion, which
won't be for several months.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=405745#405745
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|