---------------------------------------------------------- Lightning-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Wed 07/30/08: 5 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 02:48 AM - Re: Lightning Kitplanes Article (James, Clive R) 2. 03:58 AM - Re: Lightning Kitplanes Article (Brian Whittingham) 3. 05:40 AM - Re: Lightning Kitplanes Article (N1BZRich@aol.com) 4. 10:04 AM - Re: 51% Rule (jhausch) 5. 05:34 PM - Re: Re: 51% Rule (Sales Email Account) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 02:48:12 AM PST US Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article From: "James, Clive R" How about a scan and E mail out a pdf for those of us that don't get the mag across the pond...? -----Original Message----- From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Whittingham Sent: 30 July 2008 00:27 Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article Jim, Similar feelings here, but still an interesting read and great publicity. Loved the pictures too! I used to live out by that lake they're flying over. Everytime that we got ready to shoot air to air that's where we went. Brian W. > From: pequeajim@gmail.com > To: lightning-list@matronics.com > Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article > Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:18:50 -0400 > > --> > > I have mixed emotions about the article. I tend to not enjoy articles > as much when the author has multiple opinions throughout. I also think > he should have done his review based on the current production model. > If you know you are going to write about the latest version, why > comment in detail about the older one? > > I'll leave that where it lies and then add some additional thoughts later. > I don't want to ruin it for anyone either... > > Jim! > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian > Whittingham > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 6:40 PM > To: lightning-list@matronics.com > Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article > > > > > All, > > I have read the kitplanes article from the September 2008 issue. I > haven't seen it on the shelves yet, but you can buy it pay per view here: > http://www.kitplanes.com/issues/25_9/flight_reports/issues_flightrepor > ts_834 4-1.phtml or if you're a geek like me you can get it now and > then get the magazine when it comes out too! It is a great read that > will show you some of the development of the safety, reliability, and > feel. > > The last one, although I have not gotten a chance to fly the latest > verion of the Lightning is a big one. I loved the only slightly > positive pitch stability of the original. I know that Buz and Nick felt the same way. > This made it feel a lot more like an aerobatic sportplane or a > fighter. The change in feel does make the plane much easier to fly, > more forgiving, and eases the pilot workload. The new engine mount > moves the CG forward, improves feel and safety, and in my opinion > makes the plane look even better. > > You'll notice that the guy who wrote the article had to get through to > the current demonstrator in improvements before he liked the handling. > Everything else he loved about the plane except pitch feel. I won't > spoil the ending by telling you what he thought about the new changes, > but I will say this: the guy was lucky enough to fly 3 Lightnings! I > think he was just trying to get a little extra free stick time personally ;-) Brian W. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Keep your kids safer online with Windows Live Family Safety. > http://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_ > WL_fam > ily_safety_072008 > > ======================= > > > > ________________________________ Time for vacation? WIN what you need. Enter Now! ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 03:58:53 AM PST US From: Brian Whittingham Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article I think that it would raise legal issues to copy a current magazine article for mass distribution when Kitplanes is trying to sale it. You can always go to that link that I sent out though and buy a .PDF version even if you are overseas. Brian W.> Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes A rticle> Date: Wed=2C 30 Jul 2008 10:45:30 +0100> From: clive.james@uk.bp.co m> To: lightning-list@matronics.com> > --> Lightning-List message posted by : "James=2C Clive R" > > How about a scan and E mail out a pdf for those of us that don't get the> mag across the pond...? > > -----Original Message-----> From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian> Wh ittingham> Sent: 30 July 2008 00:27> To: lightning-list@matronics.com> Subj ect: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article> > Jim=2C> Similar fee lings here=2C but still an interesting read and great> publicity. Loved the pictures too! I used to live out by that lake> they're flying over. Everyt ime that we got ready to shoot air to air> that's where we went. Brian W.> > > From: pequeajim@gmail.com> > To: lightning-list@matronics.com> > Subjec t: RE: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article> > Date: Tue=2C 29 Jul 2 y" > > --> > > > > I have mixed emotions about the art icle. I tend to not enjoy articles > > as much when the author has multiple opinions throughout. I also think> > > he should have done his review base d on the current production model. > > If you know you are going to write a bout the latest version=2C why > > comment in detail about the older one?> > > > I'll leave that where it lies and then add some additional thoughts> later.> > I don't want to ruin it for anyone either...> > > > Jim!> > > > - ----Original Message-----> > From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.co m> > [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian > > Whittingham> > Sent: Tuesday=2C July 29=2C 2008 6:40 PM> > To: lightnin g-list@matronics.com> > Subject: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Articl i@hotmail.com>> > > > > > All=2C> > > > I have read the kitplanes article f rom the September 2008 issue. I > > haven't seen it on the shelves yet=2C b ut you can buy it pay per view> here:> > http://www.kitplanes.com/issues/25 _9/flight_reports/issues_flightrepor> > ts_834 4-1.phtml or if you're a gee k like me you can get it now and > > then get the magazine when it comes ou t too! It is a great read that > > will show you some of the development of the safety=2C reliability=2C and > > feel.> > > > The last one=2C although I have not gotten a chance to fly the latest > > verion of the Lightning i s a big one. I loved the only slightly > > positive pitch stability of the original. I know that Buz and Nick> felt the same way.> > This made it feel a lot more like an aerobatic sportplane or a > > fighter. The change in fe el does make the plane much easier to fly=2C > > more forgiving=2C and ease s the pilot workload. The new engine mount > > moves the CG forward=2C impr oves feel and safety=2C and in my opinion > > makes the plane look even bet ter.> > > > You'll notice that the guy who wrote the article had to get thr ough to> > > the current demonstrator in improvements before he liked the h andling.> > Everything else he loved about the plane except pitch feel. I w on't > > spoil the ending by telling you what he thought about the new chan ges=2C> > > but I will say this: the guy was lucky enough to fly 3 Lightnin gs! I > > think he was just trying to get a little extra free stick time> p ersonally =3B-) Brian W.> > > > ___________________________________________ ______________________> > Keep your kids safer online with Windows Live Fam ily Safety.> > http://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overview.html?ocid =TXT_TAGLM_> > WL_fam> > ily_safety_072008> > > > > ======= =================> > >=> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________> > Time for vacation? WIN what you nee d. Enter Now!> > > _________________________________________________________________ With Windows Live for mobile=2C your contacts travel with you. http://www.windowslive.com/mobile/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_mobile_ 072008 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:40:13 AM PST US From: N1BZRich@aol.com Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Lightning Kitplanes Article Having read both the draft article and now the final as it is published in the magazine, I think overall it is an overall good write up. However, without getting into a long discussion in this email, the writer, a good guy that has a great background in aviation, still thinks that the main reason the latest demo shows positive stability is the CG. Even though both Nick and I spend hours telling him why the previous bungee trim system was what made the original Lightning (and Esqual) fly like they were neutral to slightly unstabel in pitch, he still thinks it was a CG issue. Note, the three Lightnings he flew were within a "hair" of being at exactly at the same CG. I may get into a longer explanation in a future newsletter, but for now, just let me say that the new trim system is what made the difference and I highly recommend that flying Lightnings upgrade to that system. As an Oshkosh update, we have four Lightnings here - the factory demo, Tom and Al's Wisconsin demo, Buddy's Green Landings Special that Ryan brought up, and once again Bill Hubbard's "jet". Remember, Bill was the first to fly a customer completed Lightning to OSH last year. This Friday will be the Lightning forum and then the Lightning get together at their booth after the forum. Blue Skies, Buz **************Get fantasy football with free live scoring. Sign up for FanHouse Fantasy Football today. (http://www.fanhouse.com/fantasyaffair?ncid=aolspr00050000000020) ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 10:04:02 AM PST US Subject: Lightning-List: Re: 51% Rule From: "jhausch" I shared these comments in the EAA tent at Osh yesterday, but I want to repeat here for the comment of others: It looks like the level of completion and lack of overall builder performed glass/composite work on the Lightning might be a problem with the latest interpretation of the 51% rule. I would suggest, as an alternative to providing components of the kit in a "less complete" format, that the FAA allow a builder to demonstrate glass/composite construction skills on a part which does not become part of the final aircraft. I'd gladly build a small and simple mold; lay in gelcoat, glass, resin, etc; remove and trim; attach a bracket; etc etc. This would demonstrate to the FAA that I had the experience to work on this glass kit, but it would not require me to have large molds to do so. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195758#195758 ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 05:34:14 PM PST US From: Sales Email Account Subject: Re: Lightning-List: Re: 51% Rule Hello All, I just reviewed Van's quick build kits and I see very little difference between their state of completion and that of the delivered Arion Kit. It seems to me the Lightning should have little difficulty in demonstrating that we indeed built "51%" of our kit. However, what if the FAA says that the kit does not meet the "51%" intent of the rule, what then????? Bill Applegate, Tucson, AZ with kit #49. jhausch wrote: > >I shared these comments in the EAA tent at Osh yesterday, but I want to repeat here for the comment of others: > >It looks like the level of completion and lack of overall builder performed glass/composite work on the Lightning might be a problem with the latest interpretation of the 51% rule. > >I would suggest, as an alternative to providing components of the kit in a "less complete" format, that the FAA allow a builder to demonstrate glass/composite construction skills on a part which does not become part of the final aircraft. > >I'd gladly build a small and simple mold; lay in gelcoat, glass, resin, etc; remove and trim; attach a bracket; etc etc. > >This would demonstrate to the FAA that I had the experience to work on this glass kit, but it would not require me to have large molds to do so. > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=195758#195758 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.