---------------------------------------------------------- Lightning-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 10/30/07: 1 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 09:45 PM - Re: Re: To Tom (Charles Dewey) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 09:45:53 PM PST US From: Charles Dewey Subject: RE: Lightning-List: RE: To Tom Tom- I heard you did a great job with the area that covers the area between the wheel pant and the fuselage. can you explain how you did it? charles --- Brian Whittingham wrote: > > Charles, > Actually I could believe the Allison Turboprop > could run off of unleaded car gas. I remember a guy > filling a Lear up with 100LL. They discovered the > error and cracked out the manuals and made the > determination that they could fly. Said that Lear > planned for a 100LL burning jet engine so that if > needed it could take on fuel where jet fuel wasn't > available. They were checking to see how long they > could wanted to run on that mixture though. Guess > it burns hot and sooty, reduced time to overhaul > engines. I believe that you are probably right > about the plane being stalled. I do know that the > company still exists though and just last year put > out a special aerobatics plane. Brian W.> Date: > Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:53:37 -0700> From: > cdewey6969@yahoo.com> Subject: RE: Lightning-List: > RE: To Brian W. > To: lightning-list@matronics.com> > Dewey > > Brian, I get the > feeling the Impulse Extreme might be> an abandoned > pipe-dream project that never got off the> ground. I > noticed in one of the links on their website> the > date of 2004- so it has been at least a few> years. > They claim the Allison 250 can run off of jet> fuel > or unleaded car gas- seems like an unusual> claim... > charles> > > --- Brian Whittingham > wrote:> > > > > Charles,> > I > don't know any more about the Impulse than what> > > is posted. In over a year it doesn't look like the> > > site has changed other than adding a pic of their> > > Unlimited Aerobatic plane similar to an Extra on > the> > front page of the site. Brian W.> > > > > > Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 22:32:22 -0700> From:> > > cdewey6969@yahoo.com> Subject: RE: Lightning-List:> > > RE: To Brian W. // Tom Hoffman> To:> > > lightning-list@matronics.com> > --> Lightning-List> > > message posted by: Charles Dewey> > > > > Brian- When will the> > > Impulse Extreme be available?> > Tom Hoffman- I> > > heard you did a great job with the area> that > covers> > the area between the wheel pant and the> > fuselage.> > can you explain how you did it? > charles> > Charles>> > --- Brian Whittingham > wrote:>> > > > > > Charles,> > > Were you the one that asked> > about a turboprop> > > Lightning? Here's a vision of> > what one might > look> > like with a turboprop and> > tailwheel and > tip tanks. > >>> >> > http://www.capco-aviation.be/Impulse%20Gallery/IprobJet.jpg>> > > > It is a real aircraft, called the Capco Impulse> > >> > Xtreme. It is that! 220knot cruise speed or > 270> >> > knot full throttle. 8,000 fpm climb rates > and a> >> > fuel burn of 15gph at 220 knots. The > stall speed is>> > > 54 knots and takeoff and > landing distances are> > about> > like the > Lightning. Look through these> > aircraft> > here:> > >> > > http://www.capco-aviation.be/Impulse%20Aircraft.htm> > > > > Scroll down and look at the Impulse Xcite. It> > > has> > what I imagine the new flared tips for the> > > future> > Lightnings might look like. It features > an> > IO-320> > and cruises at 190mph on what I > would> > think would be> > around 10 gph. > > > > > Personally> > I like that small turboprop. Looks > like> > an SF-260> > turboprop, such as here:> >> >> > http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=1003679&size=L>> > > > Which is in of itself a development of the > Falco.> > > > I would also say that for an aircraft > capable> > of> > 300mph the Xtreme is probably the > lowest fuel> > that> > you'll find. That Relentless > NXT of Kevin's> > is for> > sale now on ebay, > opening bid $250k. No> > takers yet.> > He is > burning around 30 gph at full> > tilt, and about> > > 380mph! The Xcite also gives you> > an idea of what> > > it'd take to get a plane of> > roughly the same > size> > and shape up to those> > speeds. It has > about 300hp> > from a derated Allison> > turboprop. > 100hp = 175 mph,> > 300 = 250mph. Also> > notice > that 3 times the power> > doesn't equal three> > > times the speed. The first> > 200mph come at a> > > pretty low power, but the next> > 50-70mph takes 3> > > times the power! 3 times the power,> > and also> > > notice, three times the fuel burn from 5gph> > -> > > 15gph. Still, this is not bad, considering it's> >> > > about like a new Bonanza or Mooney. > > > > The> > > airplane that I was considering for modification> >> > > to a 250mph machine is this one:> >>> >> > http://www.millennium-aircraft.com/photogallery.php?id=1&img=images/multimedia/photo/1/DSC_9698T.jpg>> > > > I was looking for 250-260mph at full throttle> > >> > though. It's a beautiful little tandom seat> >> > > aerobatic airplane. It is not as wide as the> >> > > Lightning and about the same height cabin, so> > > should> > be reduction of frontal area. The wing is> > > a high> > speed design. The plane also features a> > > built in> > fire suppression system and BRS> > > equipped. It's> > capable of 190mph on a 100hp> > > Rotax. I think if you> > doubled the power, perhaps> > > a little more than double> > it'd do 250mph wide> > > open. The modified Jabiru> > engine, reportedly> > > capable of 200hp is from the> > "Snark" UAV and can> > > be read about here: > >>> >> > http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/ext.php?ref=http://www.gizmag.com.au/go/4785/1/>> > > > > > Brian W> Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:00:58> > > -0700>> > From: cdewey6969@yahoo.com> Subject: RE:>> > > > Lightning-List: RE: Flying Pencil> To:> >> > > lightning-list@matronics.com> > --> Lightning-List>> > > > message posted by: Charles Dewey> >> > > > > Brian, Thanks for the> >> > > responses. That is a lot of> great material you> > >> > gave. With the hand out the window> example, > it> >> > seems like if you had a Jabiru 3300 on a> > plane> > that> > had half the height (vertical > dimension) of>> > the> > Lightning, was only a > one-seater (thus> > narrower),>> > and one would > virtually be laying> > down while> > flying;> it > would greatly increase> > your> > aerodynamics. It > would> truly be a flying> > pencil. It> > seems like > these> aerodynamic> > improvements would> > more > than make up for> the> > lack of engine brawn, and> > > be able to push the>> > plane to 250. It actually> > > sounds really> > comfortable> practically lying > down> > while flying-> > you would have to> fight > not to sleep.> > I know we> > had this discussion> > months back- and the> >> > conclusion rached back > then was> that you simply> >> > have to have more > horse power to> propel it once> > you> > reach a > certain speed, no matter> how> > aerodynamic> > the > plane is--- is that the case> > with> this> > > prototype I have in mind? Charles> ---> > Brian> > > Whittingham wrote:> >> > > > > >> > Charles,> > I do have an appreciation for> > > all things> > that go> > fast. I do know of maybe> > > aircraft that> > are single> > or dual seat > aircraft> > capable of that> > speed and easy> > on > the fuel,> > unfortunately they> > are one of a > kind> > aircraft.> > One of these is Cory> > Bird's > "Symmetry"> > which> > probably several people> > > have seen at Oskosh. > >> > Little yellow airplane. > If> > you haven't read the>> > > history of the > plane it is> > incredible! He spent> > a> > couple > of years alone> > making the wings as> > smooth as> > > posible. They> > weren't just smooth> > though, > there was> > virtually> > no distortion in> > the > wing, even the> > slightest> > ripple or ridge.> > > > > > > There's a couple of> > unfortunate problems> > > with what> > you asked about.> > First, even though> > > I'm certain the> > guy saw some> > real benefits > in> > airspeed from that> > kind of> > attention to> > > detail, most of us aren't that> >> > dedicated > and> > consider the time put into it versus>> > > > the> > reward and decide against it. I was writing > a>> > >> > paper a couple of years back that > compared and> >> >> > contrasted light sport > aircraft for training> >> >> > purposes and compared > them to 5 popular non-light>> > >> > sport aircraft. > I compared several performance>> > >> > variables > between all aircraft. Anyhow, long> > story>> > > > short one of those was comparing the> > engines,> >> > > specifically the fuel flow in gph per> > > horsepower. >> > > All the light sport were pretty> > > much identical,> >> > which I kind of expected. > The> > thing I didn't expect>> > > was the higher> > > horsepower engines and the> > aircraft> > not> > > limited to light sport speeds also> > had almost> >> > > the exact same ratio. What this tells> > me is > that>> > > you can only get so much power out of> > > a gallon> > of> > gas, no matter how fuel efficient > the> >> > engine is. > > So, that means we have to > compete on>> > > the level of> > superior > aerodynamics. > > > >> > What> > I learned with the > Arion project was just> > how> >> > important that > frontal area of an aircraft> > is. If> >> > you > notice the Lightning doesn't have> > an elevated> >> > > seat like in a Cessna 182, you> > basically sit on > the>> > > floor. It does have a> > reclined seat > back which> >> > gives even 6 foot 4> > guys the > ability to have> >> > headroom, but doesn't> > > vertically stretch out the> >> > cockpit. How much> > > speed do you think an additional>> > > 6 inches> > > across the top of the canopy would make?> > > > > Well> > it's not just the 6 inches vertical, but> > > the 40>> > > some odd inches horizontal. That's a > lot> > of> > square> > inch area that would add to > the> >> > airframe. Now if> > you've ever stuck your > hand out>> > > the window and held> > it out like a > wing and> > felt> > it glide on the breeze,> > then > turn it> > vertical> > against the win and felt the> > > force of> > resistence,> > then you're starting > to> > understand> > how just a> > little surface can > create a> > huge> > amount of drag.> > Another point > is that of> >> > having a high natural> > laminar > flow wing. Now I'm>> > > not talking about> > > minimizing Induced Drag here,> > that> > becomes > less> > important as you go faster,> > I'm talking> > > about the> > mixing of the air caused> > by having > the> > vortices> > come off of a wing at a> > point > further> > forward> > than a NLF wing. The NLF> > > wing can basically> > be> > considered sleeker> > > because it's not displacing> >> > air as far from> > > the === message truncated == __________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message lightning-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Lightning-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/lightning-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/lightning-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.