---------------------------------------------------------- Lightning-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 10/09/06: 5 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 04:21 AM - Re: Line Drawings (Scotty) 2. 06:17 AM - Re: Lightning/Esqual Pics (nick otterback) 3. 06:38 AM - drag curve... (nick otterback) 4. 08:20 AM - Re: drag curve... (Pete) 5. 08:02 PM - Re: Lightning- Bigger Engine (Charles Dewey) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:21:12 AM PST US Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Line Drawings From: "Scotty" --> Lightning-List message posted by: "Scotty" Charles, I am not SURE it is smart to paint the plane any other color than white or some very light color. Pete and Nick would have a better idea about what their manufacturer says. Diamond Aircraft (composite and certified) are only allowed a certain number of square inches of square inches of color. They use vinyl tape which is very durable. This rule is because darker colors absorb more light (therefore heat). Obviously each type of composite has a different reaction to UV and heat, and not being a chemical, aeronautical, or structural engineer, I don't really KNOW anything about it. I do believe in the strength and beauty of composite from watching Diamonds used and abused in a flight school. I have no idea where to find FAA rules about that sort of thing. This Lightning is the first thing I have seen with speed, strength, and beauty. -------- Scotty He who doesn't read the news is UN-informed. He who reads the news is IL-informed. Mark Twain Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=66690#66690 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:17:11 AM PST US From: nick otterback Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Lightning/Esqual Pics LOL...... nick N1BZRich@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 10/8/2006 12:42:55 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, dashvii@hotmail.com writes: P.S. If you could bring that roll of duralar to SYI when you do come in November that'd be great! Did you ever get your new autopilot installed yet? Brain, I forgot to answer the above. Yes, I did get the new autopilot installed during my last trip to SYI. It is working fine. And yes, I will bring the duralar to you guys when I drive through there in early November on my way to Colorado. I need to also bring Ben my framing nail gun. I think he plans some kind of secret mods to his Mustang so it will be as fast as Nick's Corvette. If all goes according to plan I will be driving my new Corvette on this trip. Blue Skies, Buz --------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:38:32 AM PST US From: nick otterback Subject: Lightning-List: drag curve... I belive the statement of terminal velocity in this case is used in the wrong context....it was found during testing with the esqual that a "Stock" aircraft...all of their items no after market stuff; gearleg, pressure recovery wheel pants,ect....that the aircrafts total darg would not allow the airframe accelerate much past 195 IAS at any altitude not that TAS was higher ...and not taking in to account the static system errors but the IAS would not accelerate.....now i did do alot of testing poweron ...below redline RPM and at idle ...the only differance is it took longer and a steeper angle at idle.......the hybrid would go to about 210 but not much more .....and the prototype lightning will find the end of ASI without any problem...245IAS....VNE is not related to the aircrafts drag curve directly it may be mearly that the nubers are the same....but not related .....it is just that the airframe can not accelerate past that AS in its current form......the prototype is clean enough to fly that fast with out induced drag being much of limiting facor but the aircraft lacks the power to pull it much past 205 in level flight .....I am sure this sheds some light but more than likley opens up another can... Nick N1BZRich@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 10/8/2006 12:42:55 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, dashvii@hotmail.com writes: It was at an altitude of about 12,000 feet starting, power to idle, nose down to about 30 degrees and then steeper. I couldn't get anymore out of it with power at idle. So the total drag of the Esqual you were flying was the real culprit. Total meaning wings, fuselage, gear leg fairings, wheel pants, cowling, etc. Also, with the engine in idle with the prop wind milling would add to the drag total as well. It would have been interesting to do the same test in 424EA - the hybrid Esqual with the Lightning wings. But I certainly agree with your bottom line that the Lightning wing is a considerably lower drag wing than the Esqual wing. Buz --------------------------------- Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 08:20:30 AM PST US From: "Pete" Subject: RE: Lightning-List: drag curve... I found a similar result when flying N622EA, our second 3300 powered Esqual back in 2004. It was a very calm day and air was smooth. I started at 10,000ft and kept pushing the nose over at 2850 rpm. Indicated speed went up to about 190 mph and did not increase even with steeper down angles. That aircraft was stock Esqual with wheel pants all around. It just didn't want to go any faster. The prototype Lightning goes faster because of a number of things: The gear leg firings, better wheel pants, much different wing, smoother cowl, and significant changes to the high drag areas of the fuselage that were suggested by some former Lancair engineers. I do think we will see some more improvements in drag reduction from minor changes to cowl and cooling drag. Pete _____ From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of nick otterback Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 8:38 AM Subject: Lightning-List: drag curve... I belive the statement of terminal velocity in this case is used in the wrong context....it was found during testing with the esqual that a "Stock" aircraft...all of their items no after market stuff; gearleg, pressure recovery wheel pants,ect....that the aircrafts total darg would not allow the airframe accelerate much past 195 IAS at any altitude not that TAS was higher ...and not taking in to account the static system errors but the IAS would not accelerate.....now i did do alot of testing poweron ...below redline RPM and at idle ...the only differance is it took longer and a steeper angle at idle.......the hybrid would go to about 210 but not much more .....and the prototype lightning will find the end of ASI without any problem...245IAS....VNE is not related to the aircrafts drag curve directly it may be mearly that the nubers are the same....but not related .....it is just that the airframe can not accelerate past that AS in its current form......the prototype is clean enough to fly that fast with out induced drag being much of limiting facor but the aircraft lacks the power to pull it much past 205 in level flight .....I am sure this sheds some light but more than likley opens up another can... Nick N1BZRich@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 10/8/2006 12:42:55 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, dashvii@hotmail.com writes: It was at an altitude of about 12,000 feet starting, power to idle, nose down to about 30 degrees and then steeper. I couldn't get anymore out _____ Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 08:02:36 PM PST US From: Charles Dewey Subject: Lightning-List: Re: Lightning- Bigger Engine --> Lightning-List message posted by: Charles Dewey Has anyone heard about the possibility of putting an eight cylinder engine in the Lightning? Charles Dewey --- nick otterback wrote: > I belive the statement of terminal velocity in this > case is used in the wrong context....it was found > during testing with the esqual that a "Stock" > aircraft...all of their items no after market stuff; > gearleg, pressure recovery wheel pants,ect....that > the aircrafts total darg would not allow the > airframe accelerate much past 195 IAS at any > altitude not that TAS was higher ...and not taking > in to account the static system errors but the IAS > would not accelerate.....now i did do alot of > testing poweron ...below redline RPM and at idle > ...the only differance is it took longer and a > steeper angle at idle.......the hybrid would go to > about 210 but not much more .....and the prototype > lightning will find the end of ASI without any > problem...245IAS....VNE is not related to the > aircrafts drag curve directly it may be mearly that > the nubers are the same....but not related .....it > is just that the airframe can not accelerate past > that AS in its current form......the prototype is > clean enough to fly that fast with out induced drag > being much of limiting facor but the aircraft lacks > the power to pull it much past 205 in level flight > .....I am sure this sheds some light but more than > likley opens up another can... > > Nick > > N1BZRich@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 10/8/2006 12:42:55 P.M. > Eastern Daylight Time, dashvii@hotmail.com writes: > It was at an altitude of about 12,000 feet > starting, power to idle, nose > down to about 30 degrees and then steeper. I > couldn't get anymore out of it > with power at idle. > > So the total drag of the Esqual you were flying > was the real culprit. Total meaning wings, > fuselage, gear leg fairings, wheel pants, cowling, > etc. Also, with the engine in idle with the prop > wind milling would add to the drag total as well. > It would have been interesting to do the same test > in 424EA - the hybrid Esqual with the Lightning > wings. But I certainly agree with your bottom line > that the Lightning wing is a considerably lower drag > wing than the Esqual wing. > Buz > > > > > --------------------------------- > Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com __________________________________________________