Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:19 AM - Re: I flew, I flew!!! (flylightning)
2. 07:59 AM - Re: I flew, I flew!!! (Jim Langley)
3. 08:20 AM - Re: I flew, I flew!!! (GARY PENNINGTON)
4. 10:56 AM - Re: I flew, I flew!!! (Jim Langley)
5. 06:10 PM - Re: I flew, I flew!!! (GARY PENNINGTON)
6. 06:30 PM - Tie downs (GARY PENNINGTON)
7. 07:12 PM - Re: Tie downs (Jim Langley)
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: | I flew, I flew!!! |
Jim,
Congrats on your solo I am glad to hear your piloting your own jet.... Jim,
and all in the group take note of the flight testing suggestions, all to
often builders fly around in circles for 40 hours and don't do much, heck I
just met a gentleman this weekend that had 60 hours on a bird (not going to
mention the design but it wasn't a lightning) and he had not even stalled
the aircraft, important to know don't ya think. Any ways when you get into a
Cessna or piper they have come up with all the info, but now you have. Fuel
burns at different power settings, approach speeds based on your aircrafts
performance in stalls and such ( remember each system is different and
you're ASI might be different than your friends). Well you get my point, but
if your are doing your job as new experimental pilot you should never be
bored and it should take all 40 hours to get a good feel of your Jet and
what it does.
nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
N1BZRich@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: I flew, I flew!!!
In a message dated 8/24/2008 12:52:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
clive.james@uk.bp.com writes:
40 hours must be a real pain,
Has the EAA never tried to get it reduced? 40 hours is a
lot of flying just for the sake of it. Even if you do some creative
accounting......
Two points:
First, if you are using a certified prop and a certified engine it is just
25 hours. The current 40 hours (or 25) is down from the original 50 hours.
Can't remember when that changed, but that is what I had to fly off on my
homebuilt Pitts even with a certified prop and engine back in 1977 - yes, I
am an old fart.
Second, if you actually fly all the test profiles that should be flown to
determine all needed data points for your airplane, it will take quite a few
flights and hours to complete the testing. It took me close to 30 hours of
actual test flying time on the Esqual to complete everything that should be
done. The other 10 hours (to get to 40 total) were well spent learning all
the neat things that my Grand Rapids EFIS was capable of doing - such as
highway in the sky steering to a simulated instrument approach to any runway
that is in the GPS data. Really neat.
Too many builders just fly off the 40 hours and never really know their
specific airplanes. They can get away with this because most have built
airplanes that have been around for a long time and they just use the data
that others have come up with, but they really don't know the actual data
points for their airplanes. What is the real Vx, Vy, best glide (flaps and
no flaps) for your airplane. What is your best fuel burn at different
altitudes for different airspeeds or rpm?. What EGTs should you be seeing
at various power settings? What is the best prop for your airplane? I
could go on and on with examples, but hope everyone gets the point. It
really does take about 40 hours to complete all the needed test profiles for
your airplane. Without knowing these things how do you come up with a
useful aircraft flight manual (pilot's operating handbook) for your airplane
- as required by regulations?
The FAA regulations on this (FAR 21 and 91) as well as FAA Advisory Circular
90-89A are pretty specific as to what you should be doing. They call the 40
hours (or 25) phase one testing. The EAA also has some good information on
flight testing that is available through the EAA Flight Advisor Program. I
encourage all of you to go to these sources and check with your friendly EAA
flight advisor before you start your flight testing. Accidents on first
flights have greatly decreased since the EAA Flight Advisor program has been
in effect.
For my own use, I have divided the FAA 40 hours (phase one testing) into a 5
phase program that I have used successfully on several different aircraft.
The five phases that I have broken the 40 hours down to are:
-phase 1 - Initial flight plus two others
-phase 2 - Build data on aircraft and engine performance
-phase 3 - Determine all V speeds
-phase 4 - Structural and Stability tests
-phase 5 - Max gross weight and CG test
I have specific profile objectives for each phase and specific flight
profiles for the first flights and then later flight profiles are developed
based on data gathered to that point.
It really does take close to 40 hours if you do all that should be done.
You really need a plan for each flight in order to be efficient with the
time that you have. You also need a good way to record flight data that you
will use to develop such things as performance graphs. I use a digital
recorder with a lapel mic that I put into one of my ear phone cups. With a
voice operated intercom I just say the data that I want recorded and the
mic picks up me talking and saves it for future playback on the recorder.
Also, many of the new EFIS set ups have a way to record flight data for
later download which is also useful.
Bottom line, have a specific plan for each flight, follow that plan, record
your data after the flight, and then plan the next flight based on what you
learn on the previous flight and what you need to accomplish on the next
flight.
Blue Skies,
Buz
_____
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal
<http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047> here.
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: I flew, I flew!!! |
Thanks nick:
This is an exciting time for sure. I agree with both you and Buz in that
there is a lot of things to do and document to make sure that the airplanes
that we build are safe. I'm not sure where the percentages are with safety
records, (experimental vs. GA), but if it is close or better, there is a
good reason for it; and that is proper flight testing.
I just called and spoke with Dana. Is she getting a little bit of a
southern accent?
(LOL)
On 8/25/08, flylightning <info@flylightning.net> wrote:
>
> Jim,
>
>
> Congrats on your solo I am glad to hear your piloting your own jet=85=85.
. Jim,
> and all in the group take note of the flight testing suggestions, all to
> often builders fly around in circles for 40 hours and don't do much, heck
I
> just met a gentleman this weekend that had 60 hours on a bird (not going
to
> mention the design but it wasn't a lightning) and he had not even stalled
> the aircraft, important to know don't ya think. Any ways when you get int
o a
> Cessna or piper they have come up with all the info, but now you have. Fu
el
> burns at different power settings, approach speeds based on your aircraft
s
> performance in stalls and such ( remember each system is different and
> you're ASI might be different than your friends). Well you get my point,
but
> if your are doing your job as new experimental pilot you should never be
> bored and it should take all 40 hours to get a good feel of your Jet and
> what it does.
>
>
> nick
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *N1BZRich@aol.co
m
> *Sent:* Sunday, August 24, 2008 12:49 PM
> *To:* lightning-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: Lightning-List: I flew, I flew!!!
>
>
> In a message dated 8/24/2008 12:52:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> clive.james@uk.bp.com writes:
>
> 40 hours must be a real pain,
> Has the EAA never tried to get it reduced? 40 hours is a
> lot of flying just for the sake of it. Even if you do some creative
> accounting......
>
> Two points:
>
>
> First, if you are using a certified prop and a certified engine it is jus
t
> 25 hours. The current 40 hours (or 25) is down from the original 50 hour
s.
> Can't remember when that changed, but that is what I had to fly off on my
> homebuilt Pitts even with a certified prop and engine back in 1977 - yes,
I
> am an old fart.
>
>
> Second, if you actually fly all the test profiles that should be flown to
> determine all needed data points for your airplane, it will take quite a
few
> flights and hours to complete the testing. It took me close to 30 hours
of
> actual test flying time on the Esqual to complete everything that should
be
> done. The other 10 hours (to get to 40 total) were well spent learning al
l
> the neat things that my Grand Rapids EFIS was capable of doing - such as
> highway in the sky steering to a simulated instrument approach to any run
way
> that is in the GPS data. Really neat.
>
>
> Too many builders just fly off the 40 hours and never really know their
> specific airplanes. They can get away with this because most have built
> airplanes that have been around for a long time and they just use the dat
a
> that others have come up with, but they really don't know the actual data
> points for their airplanes. What is the real Vx, Vy, best glide (flaps a
nd
> no flaps) for your airplane. What is your best fuel burn at different
> altitudes for different airspeeds or rpm?. What EGTs should you be seein
g
> at various power settings? What is the best prop for your airplane? I
> could go on and on with examples, but hope everyone gets the point. It
> really does take about 40 hours to complete all the needed test profiles
for
> your airplane. Without knowing these things how do you come up with a
> useful aircraft flight manual (pilot's operating handbook) for your airpl
ane
> - as required by regulations?
>
>
> The FAA regulations on this (FAR 21 and 91) as well as FAA Advisory
> Circular 90-89A are pretty specific as to what you should be doing. They
> call the 40 hours (or 25) phase one testing. The EAA also has some good
> information on flight testing that is available through the EAA Flight
> Advisor Program. I encourage all of you to go to these sources and check
> with your friendly EAA flight advisor before you start your flight testin
g.
> Accidents on first flights have greatly decreased since the EAA Flight
> Advisor program has been in effect.
>
>
> For my own use, I have divided the FAA 40 hours (phase one testing) into
a
> 5 phase program that I have used successfully on several different
> aircraft. The five phases that I have broken the 40 hours down to are:
>
> -phase 1 - Initial flight plus two others
>
> -phase 2 - Build data on aircraft and engine performance
>
> -phase 3 - Determine all V speeds
>
> -phase 4 - Structural and Stability tests
>
> -phase 5 - Max gross weight and CG test
>
> I have specific profile objectives for each phase and specific flight
> profiles for the first flights and then later flight profiles are develop
ed
> based on data gathered to that point.
>
>
> It really does take close to 40 hours if you do all that should be done.
> You really need a plan for each flight in order to be efficient with the
> time that you have. You also need a good way to record flight data that
you
> will use to develop such things as performance graphs. I use a digital
> recorder with a lapel mic that I put into one of my ear phone cups. With
a
> voice operated intercom I just say the data that I want recorded and the
> mic picks up me talking and saves it for future playback on the recorder.
> Also, many of the new EFIS set ups have a way to record flight data for
> later download which is also useful.
>
>
> Bottom line, have a specific plan for each flight, follow that plan, reco
rd
> your data after the flight, and then plan the next flight based on what y
ou
> learn on the previous flight and what you need to accomplish on the next
> flight.
>
> Blue Skies,
>
> Buz
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> It's only a deal if it's where *you* want to go. Find your travel deal *
> here* <http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv0005000000004
7>.
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
>
> * *
>
> *
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
> *
>
>
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: I flew, I flew!!! |
Good morning everyone!
I just read the responses from Buz and Nick concerning the first 40
hours of flight in a newly built aircraft and I believe their opinions
are extremely valid. I say that because, after building two other
airplanes, (not Lightnings), they required more than 50 hours of flight
time to determine the "V" speeds, and more importantly, to "work the
bugs out". Only then did I feel comfortable flying them on longer
distances.
I sometimes find myself becoming too anxious to fly and tempted to skip
the details. It is then I must remind myself that guys like Buz and
Nick, and the folks at the FAA, are much more knowledgeable and skilled
pilots than I will ever be and how very important it is to follow time
tested rules and procedures .
Fly safe.
Gary Pennington
----- Original Message -----
From: flylightning<mailto:info@flylightning.net>
To: lightning-list@matronics.com<mailto:lightning-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 6:19 AM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: I flew, I flew!!!
Jim,
Congrats on your solo I am glad to hear your piloting your own jet....
Jim, and all in the group take note of the flight testing suggestions,
all to often builders fly around in circles for 40 hours and don't do
much, heck I just met a gentleman this weekend that had 60 hours on a
bird (not going to mention the design but it wasn't a lightning) and he
had not even stalled the aircraft, important to know don't ya think. Any
ways when you get into a Cessna or piper they have come up with all the
info, but now you have. Fuel burns at different power settings, approach
speeds based on your aircrafts performance in stalls and such ( remember
each system is different and you're ASI might be different than your
friends). Well you get my point, but if your are doing your job as new
experimental pilot you should never be bored and it should take all 40
hours to get a good feel of your Jet and what it does.
nick
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
N1BZRich@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 12:49 PM
To: lightning-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: I flew, I flew!!!
In a message dated 8/24/2008 12:52:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
clive.james@uk.bp.com writes:
40 hours must be a real pain,
Has the EAA never tried to get it reduced? 40 hours is a
lot of flying just for the sake of it. Even if you do some creative
accounting......
Two points:
First, if you are using a certified prop and a certified engine it is
just 25 hours. The current 40 hours (or 25) is down from the original
50 hours. Can't remember when that changed, but that is what I had to
fly off on my homebuilt Pitts even with a certified prop and engine back
in 1977 - yes, I am an old fart.
Second, if you actually fly all the test profiles that should be flown
to determine all needed data points for your airplane, it will take
quite a few flights and hours to complete the testing. It took me close
to 30 hours of actual test flying time on the Esqual to complete
everything that should be done. The other 10 hours (to get to 40 total)
were well spent learning all the neat things that my Grand Rapids EFIS
was capable of doing - such as highway in the sky steering to a
simulated instrument approach to any runway that is in the GPS data.
Really neat.
Too many builders just fly off the 40 hours and never really know
their specific airplanes. They can get away with this because most have
built airplanes that have been around for a long time and they just use
the data that others have come up with, but they really don't know the
actual data points for their airplanes. What is the real Vx, Vy, best
glide (flaps and no flaps) for your airplane. What is your best fuel
burn at different altitudes for different airspeeds or rpm?. What EGTs
should you be seeing at various power settings? What is the best prop
for your airplane? I could go on and on with examples, but hope
everyone gets the point. It really does take about 40 hours to complete
all the needed test profiles for your airplane. Without knowing these
things how do you come up with a useful aircraft flight manual (pilot's
operating handbook) for your airplane - as required by regulations?
The FAA regulations on this (FAR 21 and 91) as well as FAA Advisory
Circular 90-89A are pretty specific as to what you should be doing.
They call the 40 hours (or 25) phase one testing. The EAA also has some
good information on flight testing that is available through the EAA
Flight Advisor Program. I encourage all of you to go to these sources
and check with your friendly EAA flight advisor before you start your
flight testing. Accidents on first flights have greatly decreased since
the EAA Flight Advisor program has been in effect.
For my own use, I have divided the FAA 40 hours (phase one testing)
into a 5 phase program that I have used successfully on several
different aircraft. The five phases that I have broken the 40 hours
down to are:
-phase 1 - Initial flight plus two others
-phase 2 - Build data on aircraft and engine performance
-phase 3 - Determine all V speeds
-phase 4 - Structural and Stability tests
-phase 5 - Max gross weight and CG test
I have specific profile objectives for each phase and specific flight
profiles for the first flights and then later flight profiles are
developed based on data gathered to that point.
It really does take close to 40 hours if you do all that should be
done. You really need a plan for each flight in order to be efficient
with the time that you have. You also need a good way to record flight
data that you will use to develop such things as performance graphs. I
use a digital recorder with a lapel mic that I put into one of my ear
phone cups. With a voice operated intercom I just say the data that I
want recorded and the mic picks up me talking and saves it for future
playback on the recorder. Also, many of the new EFIS set ups have a way
to record flight data for later download which is also useful.
Bottom line, have a specific plan for each flight, follow that plan,
record your data after the flight, and then plan the next flight based
on what you learn on the previous flight and what you need to accomplish
on the next flight.
Blue Skies,
Buz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal
here<http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List<http://www.matronics.co
m/Navigator?Lightning-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
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: I flew, I flew!!! |
Good points Gary:
I find myself o take N730AL to Shelbyville for the fly-in, but am skeptical
that I would be able to complete all of my flight testing in time.
Better to stay safe and hitch a ride.
Jim!
On 8/25/08, GARY PENNINGTON <pennington@q.com> wrote:
>
> Good morning everyone!
>
> I just read the responses from Buz and Nick concerning the first 40 hours
> of flight in a newly built aircraft and I believe their opinions are
> extremely valid. I say that because, after building two other airplanes,
> (not Lightnings), they required more than 50 hours of flight time to
> determine the "V" speeds, *and more importantly*, to "work the bugs out".
> Only then did I feel comfortable flying them on longer distances.
>
> I sometimes find myself becoming too anxious to *fly *and tempted to skip
> the details. It is then I must remind myself that guys like Buz and Nick,
> and the folks at the FAA, are much more knowledgeable and skilled pilots
> than I will ever be and how *very *important it is to follow time tested
> rules and procedures .
>
> Fly safe.
>
> Gary Pennington
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> *From:* flylightning <info@flylightning.net>
> *To:* lightning-list@matronics.com
> *Sent:* Monday, August 25, 2008 6:19 AM
> *Subject:* RE: Lightning-List: I flew, I flew!!!
>
>
> Jim,
>
>
> Congrats on your solo I am glad to hear your piloting your own jet.... Jim,
> and all in the group take note of the flight testing suggestions, all to
> often builders fly around in circles for 40 hours and don't do much, heck I
> just met a gentleman this weekend that had 60 hours on a bird (not going to
> mention the design but it wasn't a lightning) and he had not even stalled
> the aircraft, important to know don't ya think. Any ways when you get into a
> Cessna or piper they have come up with all the info, but now you have. Fuel
> burns at different power settings, approach speeds based on your aircrafts
> performance in stalls and such ( remember each system is different and
> you're ASI might be different than your friends). Well you get my point, but
> if your are doing your job as new experimental pilot you should never be
> bored and it should take all 40 hours to get a good feel of your Jet and
> what it does.
>
>
> nick
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *N1BZRich@aol.com
> *Sent:* Sunday, August 24, 2008 12:49 PM
> *To:* lightning-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: Lightning-List: I flew, I flew!!!
>
>
> In a message dated 8/24/2008 12:52:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> clive.james@uk.bp.com writes:
>
> 40 hours must be a real pain,
> Has the EAA never tried to get it reduced? 40 hours is a
> lot of flying just for the sake of it. Even if you do some creative
> accounting......
>
> Two points:
>
>
> First, if you are using a certified prop and a certified engine it is just
> 25 hours. The current 40 hours (or 25) is down from the original 50 hours.
> Can't remember when that changed, but that is what I had to fly off on my
> homebuilt Pitts even with a certified prop and engine back in 1977 - yes, I
> am an old fart.
>
>
> Second, if you actually fly all the test profiles that should be flown to
> determine all needed data points for your airplane, it will take quite a few
> flights and hours to complete the testing. It took me close to 30 hours of
> actual test flying time on the Esqual to complete everything that should be
> done. The other 10 hours (to get to 40 total) were well spent learning all
> the neat things that my Grand Rapids EFIS was capable of doing - such as
> highway in the sky steering to a simulated instrument approach to any runway
> that is in the GPS data. Really neat.
>
>
> Too many builders just fly off the 40 hours and never really know their
> specific airplanes. They can get away with this because most have built
> airplanes that have been around for a long time and they just use the data
> that others have come up with, but they really don't know the actual data
> points for their airplanes. What is the real Vx, Vy, best glide (flaps and
> no flaps) for your airplane. What is your best fuel burn at different
> altitudes for different airspeeds or rpm?. What EGTs should you be seeing
> at various power settings? What is the best prop for your airplane? I
> could go on and on with examples, but hope everyone gets the point. It
> really does take about 40 hours to complete all the needed test profiles for
> your airplane. Without knowing these things how do you come up with a
> useful aircraft flight manual (pilot's operating handbook) for your airplane
> - as required by regulations?
>
>
> The FAA regulations on this (FAR 21 and 91) as well as FAA Advisory
> Circular 90-89A are pretty specific as to what you should be doing. They
> call the 40 hours (or 25) phase one testing. The EAA also has some good
> information on flight testing that is available through the EAA Flight
> Advisor Program. I encourage all of you to go to these sources and check
> with your friendly EAA flight advisor before you start your flight testing.
> Accidents on first flights have greatly decreased since the EAA Flight
> Advisor program has been in effect.
>
>
> For my own use, I have divided the FAA 40 hours (phase one testing) into a
> 5 phase program that I have used successfully on several different
> aircraft. The five phases that I have broken the 40 hours down to are:
>
> -phase 1 - Initial flight plus two others
>
> -phase 2 - Build data on aircraft and engine performance
>
> -phase 3 - Determine all V speeds
>
> -phase 4 - Structural and Stability tests
>
> -phase 5 - Max gross weight and CG test
>
> I have specific profile objectives for each phase and specific flight
> profiles for the first flights and then later flight profiles are developed
> based on data gathered to that point.
>
>
> It really does take close to 40 hours if you do all that should be done.
> You really need a plan for each flight in order to be efficient with the
> time that you have. You also need a good way to record flight data that you
> will use to develop such things as performance graphs. I use a digital
> recorder with a lapel mic that I put into one of my ear phone cups. With a
> voice operated intercom I just say the data that I want recorded and the
> mic picks up me talking and saves it for future playback on the recorder.
> Also, many of the new EFIS set ups have a way to record flight data for
> later download which is also useful.
>
>
> Bottom line, have a specific plan for each flight, follow that plan, record
> your data after the flight, and then plan the next flight based on what you
> learn on the previous flight and what you need to accomplish on the next
> flight.
>
> Blue Skies,
>
> Buz
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> It's only a deal if it's where *you* want to go. Find your travel deal *
> here* <http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047>.
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
>
> * *
>
> *
>
> title=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c*
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
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: I flew, I flew!!! |
Hello Jim
I envy you....flying that beautiful bird.
Gary
----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Langley<mailto:pequeajim@gmail.com>
To: lightning-list@matronics.com<mailto:lightning-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: I flew, I flew!!!
Good points Gary:
I find myself o take N730AL to Shelbyville for the fly-in, but am
skeptical that I would be able to complete all of my flight testing in
time.
Better to stay safe and hitch a ride.
Jim!
On 8/25/08, GARY PENNINGTON
<pennington@q.com<mailto:pennington@q.com>> wrote:
Good morning everyone!
I just read the responses from Buz and Nick concerning the first 40
hours of flight in a newly built aircraft and I believe their opinions
are extremely valid. I say that because, after building two other
airplanes, (not Lightnings), they required more than 50 hours of flight
time to determine the "V" speeds, and more importantly, to "work the
bugs out". Only then did I feel comfortable flying them on longer
distances.
I sometimes find myself becoming too anxious to fly and tempted to
skip the details. It is then I must remind myself that guys like Buz and
Nick, and the folks at the FAA, are much more knowledgeable and skilled
pilots than I will ever be and how very important it is to follow time
tested rules and procedures .
Fly safe.
Gary Pennington
----- Original Message -----
From: flylightning<mailto:info@flylightning.net>
To:
lightning-list@matronics.com<mailto:lightning-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 6:19 AM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: I flew, I flew!!!
Jim,
Congrats on your solo I am glad to hear your piloting your own
jet.... Jim, and all in the group take note of the flight testing
suggestions, all to often builders fly around in circles for 40 hours
and don't do much, heck I just met a gentleman this weekend that had 60
hours on a bird (not going to mention the design but it wasn't a
lightning) and he had not even stalled the aircraft, important to know
don't ya think. Any ways when you get into a Cessna or piper they have
come up with all the info, but now you have. Fuel burns at different
power settings, approach speeds based on your aircrafts performance in
stalls and such ( remember each system is different and you're ASI might
be different than your friends). Well you get my point, but if your are
doing your job as new experimental pilot you should never be bored and
it should take all 40 hours to get a good feel of your Jet and what it
does.
nick
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
From:
owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com<mailto:owner-lightning-list-ser
ver@matronics.com>
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com<mailto:owner-lightning-
list-server@matronics.com>] On Behalf Of
N1BZRich@aol.com<mailto:N1BZRich@aol.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 12:49 PM
To:
lightning-list@matronics.com<mailto:lightning-list@matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: I flew, I flew!!!
In a message dated 8/24/2008 12:52:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
clive.james@uk.bp.com<mailto:clive.james@uk.bp.com> writes:
40 hours must be a real pain,
Has the EAA never tried to get it reduced? 40 hours is a
lot of flying just for the sake of it. Even if you do some
creative
accounting......
Two points:
First, if you are using a certified prop and a certified engine it
is just 25 hours. The current 40 hours (or 25) is down from the
original 50 hours. Can't remember when that changed, but that is what I
had to fly off on my homebuilt Pitts even with a certified prop and
engine back in 1977 - yes, I am an old fart.
Second, if you actually fly all the test profiles that should be
flown to determine all needed data points for your airplane, it will
take quite a few flights and hours to complete the testing. It took me
close to 30 hours of actual test flying time on the Esqual to complete
everything that should be done. The other 10 hours (to get to 40 total)
were well spent learning all the neat things that my Grand Rapids EFIS
was capable of doing - such as highway in the sky steering to a
simulated instrument approach to any runway that is in the GPS data.
Really neat.
Too many builders just fly off the 40 hours and never really know
their specific airplanes. They can get away with this because most have
built airplanes that have been around for a long time and they just use
the data that others have come up with, but they really don't know the
actual data points for their airplanes. What is the real Vx, Vy, best
glide (flaps and no flaps) for your airplane. What is your best fuel
burn at different altitudes for different airspeeds or rpm?. What EGTs
should you be seeing at various power settings? What is the best prop
for your airplane? I could go on and on with examples, but hope
everyone gets the point. It really does take about 40 hours to complete
all the needed test profiles for your airplane. Without knowing these
things how do you come up with a useful aircraft flight manual (pilot's
operating handbook) for your airplane - as required by regulations?
The FAA regulations on this (FAR 21 and 91) as well as FAA
Advisory Circular 90-89A are pretty specific as to what you should be
doing. They call the 40 hours (or 25) phase one testing. The EAA also
has some good information on flight testing that is available through
the EAA Flight Advisor Program. I encourage all of you to go to these
sources and check with your friendly EAA flight advisor before you start
your flight testing. Accidents on first flights have greatly decreased
since the EAA Flight Advisor program has been in effect.
For my own use, I have divided the FAA 40 hours (phase one
testing) into a 5 phase program that I have used successfully on several
different aircraft. The five phases that I have broken the 40 hours
down to are:
-phase 1 - Initial flight plus two others
-phase 2 - Build data on aircraft and engine performance
-phase 3 - Determine all V speeds
-phase 4 - Structural and Stability tests
-phase 5 - Max gross weight and CG test
I have specific profile objectives for each phase and specific
flight profiles for the first flights and then later flight profiles are
developed based on data gathered to that point.
It really does take close to 40 hours if you do all that should be
done. You really need a plan for each flight in order to be efficient
with the time that you have. You also need a good way to record flight
data that you will use to develop such things as performance graphs. I
use a digital recorder with a lapel mic that I put into one of my ear
phone cups. With a voice operated intercom I just say the data that I
want recorded and the mic picks up me talking and saves it for future
playback on the recorder. Also, many of the new EFIS set ups have a way
to record flight data for later download which is also useful.
Bottom line, have a specific plan for each flight, follow that
plan, record your data after the flight, and then plan the next flight
based on what you learn on the previous flight and what you need to
accomplish on the next flight.
Blue Skies,
Buz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal
here<http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
title=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List<http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List<http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List>">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?L
ightning-List<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List>
href="http://forums.matronics.com<http://forums.matronics.com/>">http:/
/forums.matronics.com<http://forums.matronics.com/>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/co
ntribution>">http://www.matronics.com/c<http://www.matronics.com/c>
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List<http:
//www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List>
href="http://forums.matronics.com/"
target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com<http://forums.matronics.com
/>
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matron
ics.com/contribution>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List<http://www.matronics.co
m/Navigator?Lightning-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
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 |
|
Hello again to fellow builders
About three weeks ago, we had a discussion about tie downs. Call me
crazy, but I didn't like the idea of using the Aileron or Rudder
brackets for tie downs. Because of that, I've designed a tail tie down
that seems to be very strong and does not conflict with controls or
surfaces. I have attached a photo if you are interested. I used scrap
aluminum channel for the vertical bracket, which I bolted to the
stiffener web between the Vertical Stabilizer skins and aluminum angle
which I bolted a Stainless Steel Eye Bolt to. The assembly attaches to
the rear most part of the bottom of the tail section below the lower
Rudder bracket. I'm thinking about making a small fairing for the eye
bolt when I turn the plane over. Yes....I know an "eye bolt fairing" is
a little over the top.
I haven't given much thought to the wing tie downs yet....too much other
work to do, but if I come up with anything, I'll share.
Fly safe.
Gary Pennington
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 |
|
Nice idea Gary
From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of GARY
PENNINGTON
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 9:29 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: Tie downs
Hello again to fellow builders
About three weeks ago, we had a discussion about tie downs. Call me crazy,
but I didn't like the idea of using the Aileron or Rudder brackets for tie
downs. Because of that, I've designed a tail tie down that seems to be very
strong and does not conflict with controls or surfaces. I have attached a
photo if you are interested. I used scrap aluminum channel for the vertical
bracket, which I bolted to the stiffener web between the Vertical Stabilizer
skins and aluminum angle which I bolted a Stainless Steel Eye Bolt to. The
assembly attaches to the rear most part of the bottom of the tail section
below the lower Rudder bracket. I'm thinking about making a small fairing
for the eye bolt when I turn the plane over. Yes....I know an "eye bolt
fairing" is a little over the top.
I haven't given much thought to the wing tie downs yet....too much other
work to do, but if I come up with anything, I'll share.
Fly safe.
Gary Pennington
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! --
|