Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:51 AM - Thoughts on Upgrades (pdukor1@tampabay.rr.com)
2. 06:45 AM - Re: Nice trip to Green Landings (nick otterback)
3. 06:47 AM - Re: Thoughts on Upgrades (Pete)
4. 07:00 AM - Very fun ...but not aerobatic (nick otterback)
5. 07:36 AM - Re: Thinner center console (Jim Langley)
6. 07:40 AM - Re: Very fun ...but not aerobatic (Brian Whittingham)
7. 01:55 PM - (Russell, Joe)
8. 02:42 PM - Re: Re: Thoughts on Upgrades (pdukor1@tampabay.rr.com)
9. 04:30 PM - Re: Thoughts on Upgrades (Kayberg@AOL.COM)
10. 04:44 PM - Re: Thoughts on Upgrades (N1BZRich@aol.com)
11. 04:57 PM - Re: Thoughts on Upgrades (Laurie Hoffman)
12. 05:04 PM - Re: Thoughts on Upgrades (N1BZRich@AOL.COM)
13. 05:28 PM - Re: Thoughts on Upgrades (Laurie Hoffman)
14. 06:05 PM - Re: Thoughts on Upgrades (Kayberg@AOL.COM)
15. 07:29 PM - Re: Thoughts on Upgrades (Laurie Hoffman)
16. 07:44 PM - Re: Thoughts on Upgrades (Laurie Hoffman)
17. 08:24 PM - Re: Thoughts on Upgrades (Brian Whittingham)
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: | Thoughts on Upgrades |
I am new to the list, but was impressed by the plane at the Sebring
Show last weekend. in any case how about a constant speed prop like
the Airmaster (or whatever brand) which is already set up for the
3300? Seems to me the plane and pilot win in better fuel economy,
longer range and improved performance numbers from takeoff to landing.
Yeah, it is more money, I know, but I think it is the missing link to
make this a very happy rocket.
Paul dukor
Sarasota, Florida
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: Nice trip to Green Landings |
I am glad you had a good trip to Green Landings, they do a very good job with the
lightning. As far as the WT9 goes i have not flown one but have flown in close
formation at airshows and know that the Lightning out performs it, also your
insurance company will love the fact that the gear is fixed....I am confused
though both the Dynamic and the Lightning are both experimental correct? If
you have any question feel free to contact any one of our Lightning dealers or
us here inTN..
Nick
pequeajim <pequeajim@gmail.com> wrote:
I took a 2 hour drive down to Green Landings this morning. IT was quite an interesting
and educational trip. Thanks to Ryan for showing me around. They have
quite a place with a well equipped shop for assembling your aircraft.
I was able to see the aircraft in various stages of completion, as shipped, partially
finished and completed. Nice...
I'm down to two aircraft, the Lightning and Dynamic WT9.
The sale of my Murphy Rebel and a little more reserch and I will be able to order
one of them.
The main thing I like about the Lightning is that I can build it as an Experimental.
Time will tell...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=89170#89170
---------------------------------
Don't be flakey. Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile and
always stay connected to friends.
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: | Thoughts on Upgrades |
We've tried the Airmaster. To our surprise it resulted in a substantial
decrease in cruise performance. The explanation was that the Warp Drive
blades are great for speeds up to 140 knots but hit the wall above that.
We are hoping that Sensenich will get their in flight adjustable up and
running soon with the ZK blade profile that works so well with the 3300
Jabiru.
Pete
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
pdukor1@tampabay.rr.com
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 7:48 AM
Subject: Lightning-List: Thoughts on Upgrades
I am new to the list, but was impressed by the plane at the Sebring
Show last weekend. in any case how about a constant speed prop like
the Airmaster (or whatever brand) which is already set up for the
3300? Seems to me the plane and pilot win in better fuel economy,
longer range and improved performance numbers from takeoff to landing.
Yeah, it is more money, I know, but I think it is the missing link to
make this a very happy rocket.
Paul dukor
Sarasota, Florida
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: | Very fun ...but not aerobatic |
Lightning Group..
The lightning is a Very responsive and agile airplane but its design goal was
never to be an aerobatic aircraft. I am sure that they have been rolled many
times by customers, but remember it was never intended for this purpose. As the
builder and "manufacturer" of the aircraft you are responsible for what it
does and what is done with it. The Arion Aircraft Design group does not advertise
that it is aerobatic nor have we tested the Lightning for that purpose. Please
do not take this e-mail in the wrong fashion it is just an informitive post
for all that read here. Thank you very much for all the interest in the lightning
we hope to see many more well built aircraft this year.
Nick Otterback
Production Manger
Arion Aircraft LLC
Brian Whittingham <dashvii@hotmail.com> wrote:
Did you get any pics of the Green Landings Lightnings?
While the WT-9 and the Lightning look a little bit similar I think that the
Lightning is the better looking of the two planes - opinion. The Lightning
is the better performer as per the stats on each - fact. The baggage room
for the Lightning is larger than the WT-9 has - fact. The Rotax engine is a
good engine in its own right, but if you haven't flown behind the Jabiru 6
cylinder you're missing out. It is cheap to operate, fairly high TBO, and
the smoothest running engine. Also if you don't run straight pipes it is a
quiet engine. I have no idea on the cost of the WT-9, but I do know the
cost of the Lightning and for what you get it's a steal! I also haven't
flown the WT-9, but I have got about 20 hours in the Lightning and quiet a
bit of it being cross-country time. Out of about 30 different kinds of
airplanes that I have flown the Lightning is one of my favorites if not my
favorite airplane. (two others are the Cirrus SR-22, although the ride
seemed rougher than the Lightning and price is definately much higher. Also
love the old twin Beech Travel Air) It really depends on what you're after.
For me I love a sporty plane where I feel like I'm in a corvette, but I
also like a comfortable flying/riding plane. For me the controls for the
Lightning are superior! You only get this kind of a feel in airplanes with
pushrods. I love being able to feel the airplane through the stick and not
through my butt. What I mean by that is that the controls give a minute
feedback that may be unperceivable in the ride. This kind of melds the
pilot and aircraft, and honestly makes a person look like a better pilot
than they are in my opinion. The airplane's stability is a great tradeoff
between stable cross-country flyer and a fun airplane. It's an easy plane
to fly where you can make nice shallow coordinated turns and keep a constant
altitude on cross-country flights, but if you want to go up on a pretty
Sunday afternoon and want to add "extra stick" you can really roll this one.
The first time that I saw the plane it was a hollow fuselage and a pair of
wings stacked in a corner. No engine, no canopy, but the Lightning logo on
the tail. It already had me interested, but seeing the plane progress and
the constant improving and experimenting before the first kits sold told me
it'd be a good flying plane. I constantly asked Nick what the performance
specs were up to as the flight test program progressed. The original
guestimate data was met in every performance regime, which is impressive
enough, but if I'm not mistaken it was exceeded in every regime. I was
somewhat sceptical that they could do what is now published, but I can now
tell you from experience it will. This one is a hoot to fly. I know that
Buz can back me up on that one!
This airplane has been rolled many times. It is certified to 5g's which is
what the Citabria that I learned aerobatics in was. Don't know if it's been
looped or not.
One last note is that from time to time I do work with the company, but I am
not on the payroll and do not work for them. I do have a biased opinion in
that I love that plane and I really do love that Jabiru six, but think that
my flight review is unbiased and a fair assessment. I'll try to post that
again if I can find it. Thanks, Brian W.
_________________________________________________________________
Type your favorite song. Get a customized station. Try MSN Radio powered
by Pandora. http://radio.msn.com/?icid=T002MSN03A07001
---------------------------------
Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
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: | Re: Thinner center console |
Hi Mark:
I wouldn't want to eliminate the center console, but my original question
was about reducing it's size and you have answered that question, thanks...
Yes, I sat in Ryan's, so if I am able to make it down to Fun n Sun, I will
take the time to sit in the demo with the newer seats and console. I'm sure
it will be more to my liking as I really wasn't far off with Ryan's
aircraft.
Jim!
On 1/21/07, Mark Stauffer <mark.stauffer1@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> mark.stauffer1@gmail.com>
>
> Jim,
>
> You cannot do away with the center console. Underneath the console are the
> elevator push rod and the flap motor.
>
> The center console and seats have been redesigned and I don't believe Ryan
> has a kit with the newest version. The new center console is narrower (I
> believe it's 3" now) and really can't be trimmed down anymore without
> interfering with the push rod or flap motor.
>
> The center console at your hips and thigh is glass, not metal. The only
> metal in the console is the vertical piece that goes from the front edge
> of
> the console up to the instrument panel. That piece typically houses the
> fuel
> valves, fuel line and some electrical wires.
>
> Hope this helps. If you have anymore questions please feel free to ask.
>
> Mark
>
> Mark Stauffer
> Arion Aircraft Builders Assist Program
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of pequeajim
> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2007 9:42 PM
> To: lightning-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Lightning-List: Thinner center console
>
>
>
> In sitting in the Lightning today, it was just a "tad" tight on my big
> butt!
>
> I wonder if there are plans to widen the cockpit, or make some
> modifications
> for a little more space? I'm 6'-2" and a little on the wide side.
>
> One thought would be a glass center console that is more narrow than the
> metal version currently being used?
>
> Jim!
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=89193#89193
>
>
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: | Very fun ...but not aerobatic |
Yes, I probably should put a disclaimer on my email there. It is a normal
category aircraft, not an aerobatic aircraft. It is highly manueverable
though and have both seen it rolled and have read others that have rolled
it. You could roll a Cherokee 140 though if you had the mind to. Basically
you are making yourself into a test pilot since these conditions were never
tested by the company. I'm sure that they don't want the liability of
saying that you could when they haven't tested it either. Again I don't
work for the company and am therefore not an authorized spokesperson. Just
lucky enough to have flown the Lightning's and live in the area so I can
check up on the progress from time to time. Good catch there Nick, Brian W.
_________________________________________________________________
Get in the mood for Valentine's Day. View photos, recipes and more on your
Live.com page.
http://www.live.com/?addTemplate=ValentinesDay&ocid=T001MSN30A0701
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 |
|
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: Thoughts on Upgrades |
Whoda thunk that!
Thanks for the quick reply since I was still agonizing over it and
planning a spot on the panel for the controller!
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: Pete <pete@flylightning.net>
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Thoughts on Upgrades
>
> We've tried the Airmaster. To our surprise it resulted in a
> substantialdecrease in cruise performance. The explanation was
> that the Warp Drive
> blades are great for speeds up to 140 knots but hit the wall above
> that.
>
> We are hoping that Sensenich will get their in flight adjustable
> up and
> running soon with the ZK blade profile that works so well with the
> 3300Jabiru.
>
> Pete
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> pdukor1@tampabay.rr.com
> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 7:48 AM
> To: lightning-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Lightning-List: Thoughts on Upgrades
>
>
> I am new to the list, but was impressed by the plane at the
> Sebring
> Show last weekend. in any case how about a constant speed prop
> like
> the Airmaster (or whatever brand) which is already set up for the
> 3300? Seems to me the plane and pilot win in better fuel economy,
> longer range and improved performance numbers from takeoff to
> landing.
> Yeah, it is more money, I know, but I think it is the missing link
> to
> make this a very happy rocket.
>
> Paul dukor
> Sarasota, Florida
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Thoughts on Upgrades |
My understanding is that constant speed props dont make for faster
airspeeds; only
1) better takeoff thrust
2) more weight
3) more money
4) possible better economy since it allows for higher "lugging power" at
lower prop speeds that a prop optimosed for top speed.
If there is a radical difference between stall speeds and top speed,
changing prop speeds can make a difference in fuel burn and keep the prop from
cavitating at static/early takeoff.
But generally you need in excess of 150 hp for it to be worth it....which is
why Piper and Cessna havent messed with putting one on the Cessna 150 or the
Piper 140 Cherokee.
I suspect the best prop deal for the Lightning is simply the lightest wooden
fixed pitch one that will allow
3300 rpm at WOT.
But I could be wrong.......
Doug Koenigsberg
In a message dated 1/22/2007 5:44:41 PM Eastern Standard Time,
pdukor1@tampabay.rr.com writes:
> I am new to the list, but was impressed by the plane at the
> Sebring
> Show last weekend. in any case how about a constant speed prop
> like
> the Airmaster (or whatever brand) which is already set up for the
> 3300? Seems to me the plane and pilot win in better fuel economy,
> longer range and improved performance numbers from takeoff to
> landing.
> Yeah, it is more money, I know, but I think it is the missing link
> to
> make this a very happy rocket.
>
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: Thoughts on Upgrades |
In a message dated 1/22/2007 7:39:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Kayberg@aol.com writes:
I suspect the best prop deal for the Lightning is simply the lightest wooden
fixed pitch one that will allow
3300 rpm at WOT.
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: Thoughts on Upgrades |
Doug,
Re pitch change allowing faster cruise speeds....
We have a Hoffmann 3 position variable pitch prop on
our 80hp Dimona motorglider. Fine for takeoff, course
for cruise and feather for gliding engine off. The
prop is ground adjustable for pitch variations in any
of these settings.
In fine, the Limbach engine provides a rate of climb
of around 400'-450'fpm @ 55kts. It would rapidly
approach and exceed red line of 3200rpm (3000-3200rpm
continuous for <5mins permitted on takeoff) beyond
60kts IAS even in climb.
Resetting the pitch to cruise provides an IAS of
85-90kts @ 2700rpm. In our case at least the pitch
variation does make a big difference to cruise speed
achieved.
As an aside, I am amazed at just how small a variation
in pitch there is between our fine and course
settings. Observing the pitch change from outside the
cockpit while someone in it alters the settings, the
change is barely discernable.
Laurie
Sydney
--- Kayberg@aol.com wrote:
>
> My understanding is that constant speed props dont
> make for faster
> airspeeds; only
>
> 1) better takeoff thrust
> 2) more weight
> 3) more money
> 4) possible better economy since it allows for
> higher "lugging power" at
> lower prop speeds that a prop optimosed for top
> speed.
>
> If there is a radical difference between stall
> speeds and top speed,
> changing prop speeds can make a difference in fuel
> burn and keep the prop from
> cavitating at static/early takeoff.
>
> But generally you need in excess of 150 hp for it to
> be worth it....which is
> why Piper and Cessna havent messed with putting one
> on the Cessna 150 or the
> Piper 140 Cherokee.
>
> I suspect the best prop deal for the Lightning is
> simply the lightest wooden
> fixed pitch one that will allow
> 3300 rpm at WOT.
>
> But I could be wrong.......
>
> Doug Koenigsberg
>
> In a message dated 1/22/2007 5:44:41 PM Eastern
> Standard Time,
> pdukor1@tampabay.rr.com writes:
>
>
> > I am new to the list, but was impressed by the
> plane at the
> > Sebring
> > Show last weekend. in any case how about a
> constant speed prop
> > like
> > the Airmaster (or whatever brand) which is already
> set up for the
> > 3300? Seems to me the plane and pilot win in
> better fuel economy,
> > longer range and improved performance numbers from
> takeoff to
> > landing.
> > Yeah, it is more money, I know, but I think it is
> the missing link
> > to
> > make this a very happy rocket.
> >
>
>
>
>
>
Never Miss an Email
Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started!
http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail
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: Thoughts on Upgrades |
In a message dated 1/22/2007 7:39:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Kayberg@aol.com writes:
I suspect the best prop deal for the Lightning is simply the lightest wooden
fixed pitch one that will allow
3300 rpm at WOT.
I agree with Doug on this. With the Lightning's low stall speed, short
takeoff roll, and good rate of climb, why not just put on a prop that will do
as Doug says - the lightest wooden fixed pitch one that will allow 3300 rpm
at WOT. Even with this so called "cruise / speed prop" on the Lightning the
take off roll is still very short, the climb rate is still very good, and the
low stall speed allows for relatively slow approaches. Therefore, with the
right cruise prop installed the Lightning can operate out of short runways
and still "go like stink". In my book, the simplest answer is normally the
best plan. Cheaper, lighter, foolproof.
And besides, are we really talking about a constant speed prop (one that
uses engine oil as the hydraulic media to keep the prop at a constant set
rpm), or one that has a variable pitch control from the cockpit and is
electrically operated by the pilot to change pitch and might need lots of attention
to keep a constant rpm. Kind of like the old electric props on the older
Bonanzas. Sensenich showed me a pre-production model of this type of hub at
Oshkosh two years ago. It looked good, but is going to be costly. I think you
will probably be able to buy four or five Sensenich fixed pitch props for the
price of one of these. Just my $.02 worth. Your mileage may vary.
Blue Skies,
Buz
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: Thoughts on Upgrades |
On re-reading my post it could seem that I'm
advocating a variable pitch prop for the Lightning. On
the contrary, as Buz has well described, I don't
believe the benefits would outway the losses in terms
of cost, weight and complexity.
I'll be going for a ground adjustable fixed pitch prop
for my Lightning when the time comes for me to order
my kit.
Laurie
--- N1BZRich@aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 1/22/2007 7:39:41 P.M. Eastern
> Standard Time,
> Kayberg@aol.com writes:
>
> I suspect the best prop deal for the Lightning is
> simply the lightest wooden
> fixed pitch one that will allow
> 3300 rpm at WOT.
>
>
>
> I agree with Doug on this. With the
> Lightning's low stall speed, short
> takeoff roll, and good rate of climb, why not just
> put on a prop that will do
> as Doug says - the lightest wooden fixed pitch one
> that will allow 3300 rpm
> at WOT. Even with this so called "cruise / speed
> prop" on the Lightning the
> take off roll is still very short, the climb rate
> is still very good, and the
> low stall speed allows for relatively slow
> approaches. Therefore, with the
> right cruise prop installed the Lightning can
> operate out of short runways
> and still "go like stink". In my book, the
> simplest answer is normally the
> best plan. Cheaper, lighter, foolproof.
> And besides, are we really talking about a
> constant speed prop (one that
> uses engine oil as the hydraulic media to keep the
> prop at a constant set
> rpm), or one that has a variable pitch control from
> the cockpit and is
> electrically operated by the pilot to change pitch
> and might need lots of attention
> to keep a constant rpm. Kind of like the old
> electric props on the older
> Bonanzas. Sensenich showed me a pre-production
> model of this type of hub at
> Oshkosh two years ago. It looked good, but is
> going to be costly. I think you
> will probably be able to buy four or five Sensenich
> fixed pitch props for the
> price of one of these. Just my $.02 worth. Your
> mileage may vary.
> Blue Skies,
> Buz
>
Need Mail bonding?
Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
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: Thoughts on Upgrades |
Laurie,
I know you have already responded to Buz and agree at least in principle
with both of us, but I want to just note that the Limbach is a fine motor, but
different in design....as well as only 2/3 the horsepower of the 3300 Jabiru.
Not to mention it is bolted to a motorglider. I suspect the weights of
both aircraft are similar, as well as the engines. In fact, the Limbach may be
slightly heavier.
Without that prop, you really cannot motorglide, of course. Or at least not
nearly as well.
Ryan has been amusing himself lately by shutting the Jabiru engine down and
gliding from significant distances away from the field to see how well he can
glide/practice engine-outs. It really is quite substantial. The suggested
17:1 glide ratio is not far off. I suspect you are closer to 25:1 Our
skills dont include soaring just yet, even tho we are near a good ridge to
practice on.
But It really is about the horsepower.
Doug Koenigberg
In a message dated 1/22/2007 8:01:05 PM Eastern Standard Time,
lozhoffman@yahoo.com writes:
Doug,
Re pitch change allowing faster cruise speeds....
We have a Hoffmann 3 position variable pitch prop on
our 80hp Dimona motorglider. Fine for takeoff, course
for cruise and feather for gliding engine off. The
prop is ground adjustable for pitch variations in any
of these settings.
In fine, the Limbach engine provides a rate of climb
of around 400'-450'fpm @ 55kts. It would rapidly
approach and exceed red line of 3200rpm (3000-3200rpm
continuous for <5mins permitted on takeoff) beyond
60kts IAS even in climb.
Resetting the pitch to cruise provides an IAS of
85-90kts @ 2700rpm. In our case at least the pitch
variation does make a big difference to cruise speed
achieved.
As an aside, I am amazed at just how small a variation
in pitch there is between our fine and course
settings. Observing the pitch change from outside the
cockpit while someone in it alters the settings, the
change is barely discernable.
Laurie
Sydney
--- Kayberg@aol.com wrote:
Message 15
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: Thoughts on Upgrades |
Thnx Doug,
The 17:1 glide ratio was one thing that had caught my
eye. Not so much from the perspective of shutting down
and attempting to soar the Lightning but more as
indicative of how aerodynamically clean the airframe
must be. The polar curve for the aircraft would be
interesting though. Anyone have any idea of the
Lightning's best glide speed ie at which speed it
achieves 17:1 and the subsequent sink rate?
Laurie
--- Kayberg@aol.com wrote:
>
> Laurie,
>
> I know you have already responded to Buz and agree
> at least in principle
> with both of us, but I want to just note that the
> Limbach is a fine motor, but
> different in design....as well as only 2/3 the
> horsepower of the 3300 Jabiru.
> Not to mention it is bolted to a motorglider. I
> suspect the weights of
> both aircraft are similar, as well as the engines.
> In fact, the Limbach may be
> slightly heavier.
>
> Without that prop, you really cannot motorglide, of
> course. Or at least not
> nearly as well.
>
> Ryan has been amusing himself lately by shutting the
> Jabiru engine down and
> gliding from significant distances away from the
> field to see how well he can
> glide/practice engine-outs. It really is quite
> substantial. The suggested
> 17:1 glide ratio is not far off. I suspect you are
> closer to 25:1 Our
> skills dont include soaring just yet, even tho we
> are near a good ridge to
> practice on.
>
> But It really is about the horsepower.
>
> Doug Koenigberg
>
>
> In a message dated 1/22/2007 8:01:05 PM Eastern
> Standard Time,
> lozhoffman@yahoo.com writes:
>
>
> Doug,
> Re pitch change allowing faster cruise speeds....
>
> We have a Hoffmann 3 position variable pitch prop on
> our 80hp Dimona motorglider. Fine for takeoff,
> course
> for cruise and feather for gliding engine off. The
> prop is ground adjustable for pitch variations in
> any
> of these settings.
>
> In fine, the Limbach engine provides a rate of
> climb
> of around 400'-450'fpm @ 55kts. It would rapidly
> approach and exceed red line of 3200rpm
> (3000-3200rpm
> continuous for <5mins permitted on takeoff) beyond
> 60kts IAS even in climb.
>
> Resetting the pitch to cruise provides an IAS of
> 85-90kts @ 2700rpm. In our case at least the pitch
> variation does make a big difference to cruise speed
> achieved.
>
> As an aside, I am amazed at just how small a
> variation
> in pitch there is between our fine and course
> settings. Observing the pitch change from outside
> the
> cockpit while someone in it alters the settings,
> the
> change is barely discernable.
>
> Laurie
> Sydney
> --- Kayberg@aol.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
Never Miss an Email
Stay connected with Yahoo! Mail on your mobile. Get started!
http://mobile.yahoo.com/services?promote=mail
Message 16
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: Thoughts on Upgrades |
Doug,
just in case you aren't already aware of it, shock
cooling is a major source of premature cylinder head
failure. Its something to be very mindful of if
shutting down midflight.
We fitted a LCD shock cooling alert to the Super cub
that I flew towing gliders for many years and it was
invaluable. We also had one fitted to another
motorglider which had cowl flaps just in case adequate
checks weren't carried out.
Its not so much the absolute temp changes but the rate
of cooling which is critical. Initial power reductions
should be very minor and incremental. We gradually
pull power back over several minutes until the CHT is
quite low before shutting down. Something to keep in
mind with the Lightning.
Sure is nice to be able to shutdown and glide those
last 50 miles from a good cruising level even when no
lift is available!
Laurie
--- Kayberg@aol.com wrote:
>
> Laurie,
>
> I know you have already responded to Buz and agree
> at least in principle
> with both of us, but I want to just note that the
> Limbach is a fine motor, but
> different in design....as well as only 2/3 the
> horsepower of the 3300 Jabiru.
> Not to mention it is bolted to a motorglider. I
> suspect the weights of
> both aircraft are similar, as well as the engines.
> In fact, the Limbach may be
> slightly heavier.
>
> Without that prop, you really cannot motorglide, of
> course. Or at least not
> nearly as well.
>
> Ryan has been amusing himself lately by shutting the
> Jabiru engine down and
> gliding from significant distances away from the
> field to see how well he can
> glide/practice engine-outs. It really is quite
> substantial. The suggested
> 17:1 glide ratio is not far off. I suspect you are
> closer to 25:1 Our
> skills dont include soaring just yet, even tho we
> are near a good ridge to
> practice on.
>
> But It really is about the horsepower.
>
> Doug Koenigberg
>
>
> In a message dated 1/22/2007 8:01:05 PM Eastern
> Standard Time,
> lozhoffman@yahoo.com writes:
>
>
> Doug,
> Re pitch change allowing faster cruise speeds....
>
> We have a Hoffmann 3 position variable pitch prop on
> our 80hp Dimona motorglider. Fine for takeoff,
> course
> for cruise and feather for gliding engine off. The
> prop is ground adjustable for pitch variations in
> any
> of these settings.
>
> In fine, the Limbach engine provides a rate of
> climb
> of around 400'-450'fpm @ 55kts. It would rapidly
> approach and exceed red line of 3200rpm
> (3000-3200rpm
> continuous for <5mins permitted on takeoff) beyond
> 60kts IAS even in climb.
>
> Resetting the pitch to cruise provides an IAS of
> 85-90kts @ 2700rpm. In our case at least the pitch
> variation does make a big difference to cruise speed
> achieved.
>
> As an aside, I am amazed at just how small a
> variation
> in pitch there is between our fine and course
> settings. Observing the pitch change from outside
> the
> cockpit while someone in it alters the settings,
> the
> change is barely discernable.
>
> Laurie
> Sydney
> --- Kayberg@aol.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
Looking for earth-friendly autos?
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
Message 17
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: Thoughts on Upgrades |
One of the things that I am going to try to do is to determine the
coefficient of drag on the Lightning before and after my modifications.
>From that I can give you a better guess at how much performance gains I can
get out of the speed mods. I'll also do the glide testing to verify data.
I'll have use of an instrumentation package to record the inflight data and
can download that into the laptop when I get down. Should be interesting.
Brian W.
_________________________________________________________________
Search for grocery stores. Find gratitude. Turn a simple search into
something more.
http://click4thecause.live.com/search/charity/default.aspx?source=hmemtagline_gratitude&FORM=WLMTAG
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! --
|