Submitted by Anonymous on

Forums: 

From: Chris Moore <cmoore [at] apexus.com.au>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 19:26:43 +0930
To: 'lancair.list [at] olsusa.com' <lancair.list [at] olsusa.com>

X-Mailing-List: lancair.list [at] olsusa.com



          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>>

anti-servo tab



Scot Dahlgren wrote,



"I was considering adding an anti-servo tab to my small tail. can anyone tell

me;



-the dimensions of the servo tab on the bigger tail (lxw)

-the gearing (how many degrees servo tab up for 10 degrees tail up)

-the dimensions of the big tail."



to Scott and others:- in Australia people are using anti-servo tabs initially to please our aviation authority, who require the back pressure on the elevator control to be increased and for reasons that have been subject to test and discussion for some years.  Generally these anti-servo's consist of a linkage which causes the trim tab to increase in angle as the elevator is moved in the same direction thus increasing the returning force.

We measured the net angular effect of one of the trim tab linkages used here on a machine that is flying and the owner is pleased with the feel and response and we are incorporating the same angles on the larger Mk11 tail, the measurements are as follows:-



(a) If the elevaor and trim tab is initially in the in line with the tail plane ie, the centered position to begin with, then moving the elevator to its maximum up position(+26 degrees) will cause the trim tab to move (rotate) +22 degrees up and  if the elevator is moved to its maximum down position (-11 degrees) then the trim tab will move (rotate) -10 degrees.

(b) If the trim tab is already up the maximum amount (+30 degrees) when the elevator is centered in line with the tailplane then moving the elevator to the maximum up postion (+26 degrees) will cause the trim tab to move from +30 degrees to +54 degrees and moving the elevator to its maximum down position (-11 degrees) will cause the trim tab to move from +30 degrees to +18 degrees.

(c) If the trim tab is already down the maximum amount (-30 degrees) when the elevator is in line with the tailplane then moving the elevator to the maximum down position (-11 degrees)  will move the trim tab from -30 degrees to -42 degrees and moving the elevator to the maximum up position will cause the trim tab to move from -30 degrees to -2 degrees.



Scott or others if you are interested we have a drawing done by one of the partners in our project showing how we very simply moved the ESCO trim actuator to achieve the desired result.  If anyone is interested please email me and I will and I will send it as a pdf file or fax it to you if there isn't many.  Please bear in mind our plane is nearing completion but has yet to be flown and tested.



Chris Moore

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: James H. Keyworth <jhk [at] clearwire.net>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Wed, 03 May 2006 19:29:11 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Jeff Meininger wrote:
 
"...some photo editing software.  You can easily "find"
the
remainder of the vertical stab by increasing the contrast.So no smoke, mirrors,
or shutter errors....  Just a case of a sky-blue
paint job and a
sky-blue sky.  :)"
 
Wow! Thank you Jeff!
 
JHK
 
 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 10:51:43 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Just had a thought about the gentleman who lost
pressurization over the Sierras.
Although the door seal switch tested fine after
this event, they way I have interpreted all the posts is that somehow,
the door seal switch had moved during flight.
Has anyone given any thought to replacing the
toggle switch provided with the kit for either a guarded toggle switch, or at
least the one that requires you to pull up on the switch before it will
move?
Just a thought
Craig Blitzer
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com

 
L-IV-P
798CB 80 hours, ready for
paint!!

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 19:46:15 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Here is an interesting question -
The two latches on my LIV-P work fine, have for
almost a year now.  Go for a 50 minute flight, plane sits on very hot ramp
for approx. 1-1/2 hours.
Get ready to leave and the 2nd set of latches,
will not close all the way.  Cab get them closed about 90% but I can feel
that the latches will not "click" to the closed position.
The door seal WAS DEFLATED during my attempts to
close the 2nd group of latches.
My only thought is some type of heat expansion?? As
soon as we landed I deflated door seal and the latches now all closed
fine.  If it was heat expansion, the skin of the plane would have cooled
from the flight home right???
I an anxious to try again on a hot day but this
time I will use my canopy cover and see if that helps.
Any other thoughts or experiences?
Thanks
Craig B
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com

 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Robert R Pastusek <rpastusek [at] htii.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [LML]
Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 08:29:28 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Craig Blitzer wrote:

Here is an interesting question -

The two latches on my LIV-P work fine,
have for almost a year now.  Go for a 50 minute flight, plane sits on very
hot ramp for approx. 1-1/2 hours.

Get ready to leave and the 2nd set
of latches, will not close all the way.  Cab get them closed about 90% but
I can feel that the latches will not "click" to the closed position.

The door seal WAS DEFLATED during my
attempts to close the 2nd group of latches.

My only thought is some type of heat
expansion?? As soon as we landed I deflated door seal and the latches now all
closed fine.  If it was heat expansion, the skin of the plane would have
cooled from the flight home right???

I an anxious to try again on a hot day
but this time I will use my canopy cover and see if that helps.

Any other thoughts or experiences?

 

Craig, I
think you should figure this out before flying pressurized without all of the
latches firmly latched "over center." At least a couple of owners are
around to tell the tale of what it's like to lose a door in flight. Some may
not have been that lucky. The adjustment of these can be pretty tricky, but it
can be done. I installed a small micro switch at the "end" of each
chain (front and rear edges of the door, and bottom—three total) to monitor the
"over center" of the last latch, thinking that if that one went over
center, the rest would likely be fully latched as well.

 

Bob Pastusek

 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 08:29:28 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
With regard to the door seal on the IV-P, I agree
silicone and paint do not mix so once the door is painted, what is the preferred
method of attaching door seal permanently?
Craig Blitzer
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 00:38:04 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Would someone be so kind as to email me a picture
of what the finished trailing and leading edges of the winglets should look like
after sanding.
Thanks
Craig Blitzer
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 18:00:13 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Does anyone have a picture they can share that
shows the IV-P rear wing spar attached without the cover?
Thanks
Craig Blitzer
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com

 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 21:33:33 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
I have a used Advanced Flight Systems AF-2500
eninge monitoring unit for sale at a drastically reduced price.
If anyone is interested please email me
off-list.
Thanks
Craig Blitzer
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Gerard O Connell <goconnell [at] dodo.com.au>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:45:10 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Can anyone advise on the correct hydraulic power pack for the 320?

I
think the pump I need is item 642666 which is described as a 32 series
12 volt pump....the cubic capacity is roughly half of the pump I was sent
(twice) by lancair. The 642666 is rated as a 0.0187 CIPR
pump size on the aerocraft website.

The pump I have been sent for
the 320  is physically almost twice the size of my existing
unit and the LAME advises me it will not fit in the Lancair
without substantial mods. He also reckons it would be far too powerful for
raising/lowering the gear. I think it is the 0.032 CIPR item 638082. Is
this indeed the correct pump?

 The sales department tell me it
is the same unit and perhaps my original pump is non standard Lancair issue.
I was not the builder, so I don't know what was supplied with the
kit.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated as each time I have a
pump shipped over to Australia it costs $$$$.

--
Gerard O
Connell
Melbourne, Australia
VH-LPD (LNC2)





________________________________________________





Dodo
- an Official Sponsor of the

2006 FORMULA 1 (tm)

Foster's Australian Grand Prix

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 01:24:36 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Has anyone successfully/safely installed a live
weather radar pod on a IV-P?
 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Marvin Kaye <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML]
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 23:41:59 -0400
To: <lml>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Posted for "colyncase on earthlink" <colyncase [at] earthlink.net>:



 No but I have such a pod with 10 gal fuel tank that I will sell you for an

outrageous price (have to recover engineering.....)

 

 

 > Has anyone successfully/safely installed a live weather radar pod on a IV-P?

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 01:48:18 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
I have an Advance Flight Systems AF-2500
engine monitoring unit for sale.
Half-off manufactures' price.
Less than 80 hours in aircraft.
Craig B.
Email me off list  if interested
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Marvin Kaye <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re:
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 23:52:55 -0400
To: <lml>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

[This note came to my private email address... I don't have my drawings at my present location and hope that one of you out there might help this gentleman out.  Please reply directly to him if you can, as he isn't a subscriber to the LML.  CC the LML with your reply, though... it would be a nice piece of information to get into the archives.  Thanks for your help.   <Marv>    ]







Posted for "Paul Armstrong" <parmstrong [at] deerhornaviation.com>:



 Hello Sir,

 

 I am Paul Armstrong, I own a VENTURE 2/3 scale P-51 mustang prototype.

 This aircraft was a prototype with a basic hydraulic gear system and I have

 added Inner Gear Doors. I have purchased the kit for the lancair 320 that

 allows inner gear door sequencing.

 I am in need of the Elec/Hyd schematics for the 320 so I can integrate this

 sequencing kit into my aircraft.

 I would appreciate any help or direction you could provide.

 Thanks

 Paul Armstrong

 

 432-560-2470

 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: <Sky2high [at] aol.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re:
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 12:09:55 -0400
To: <lml>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

In a message dated 7/10/2006 10:53:06 P.M. Central Standard Time,
marv [at] lancaironline.net writes:

[This
note came to my private email address... I don't have my drawings at my

present location and hope that one of you out there might help this
gentleman
out.  Please reply directly to him if you can, as he isn't
a subscriber to the
LML.  CC the LML with your reply, though... it
would be a nice piece of
information to get into the archives. 
Thanks for your help.   <Marv>   
]



Posted for "Paul Armstrong"
<parmstrong [at] deerhornaviation.com>:

  Hello Sir,
 

  I am Paul Armstrong, I own a VENTURE 2/3 scale P-51 mustang
prototype.
  This aircraft was a prototype with a basic hydraulic gear
system and I have
  added Inner Gear Doors. I have purchased the kit
for the lancair 320 that
  allows inner gear door
sequencing.
  I am in need of the Elec/Hyd schematics for the 320 so I
can integrate this
  sequencing kit into my aircraft.
  I
would appreciate any help or direction you could provide.
 
Thanks
  Paul Armstrong
 
  432-560-2470
 

Paul,
 
The inner gear door actuators are spring loaded and actuated by the same
hydraulics as the gear down operation to accomplish their opening. 
 
The sequence valves are actually check valves that do not let fluid from
the up side to flow to the door actuators for
closing until each main gear leg (or tab on the nose gear)
depresses the plunger and defeats the check valve.    Thus, the
doors do not close until the gear is up and tight.  There are no electrics
associated with this function.  Attached are 3 images - the std 320 gear
wiring diagram, pump details and the hydraulic schematic.
 
Good Luck.
 
Contact me via email if you have further questions.
 
Scott Krueger
AKA Grayhawk
Lancair N92EX IO320 SB 89/96
Aurora, IL
(KARR)

Abnegate Exigencies!

Attachment 
(248K)

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Dominic V Crain <domcrain [at] tpg.com.au>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 21:00:45 -0400
To: <lml>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Advice please from experts:

Has anyone had any radio issues using the Monroy ATD
300 poor man’s TCAS, with the audio lead plugged into the headset socket?

I have a loud(ish) squeal on radio Tx, and an expert
suggested the SPA 400 needed changing, if the squeal disappeared with the IC
switched off. It did, and changed the SPA 400. However it still squeals.

Tried a little trouble shooting yesterday, and it
seemed the ATD 300 audio plug might be the cause, in that when removed the
squeal disappeared. However that was on ground engine off. The alternator is
both internally and externally suppressed.

 

Dom Crain

VH-CZJ

 

Thanks Gre(a)yhawk

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Klaus Savier <klaus [at] lightspeedengineering.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:25:25 -0400
To: <lml>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Regarding your info you published on the Lancair list:
 The manual for the Plasma CDI asks that the timing is verified with a strobe light before flight.
What numbers did you see when you did this test and how did they differ from the display?
With your engine not running, altimeter set to 0 ft altitude, what does your MP indicate on each instrument?




Regards,
Klaus Savier
Light Speed Engineering
P.O. Box 549
416 E. Santa Maria St. #15
Santa Paula, CA 93060
klaus [at] lightspeedengineering.com

Tel: (805) 933-3299  Fax: (805) 525-0199



Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Lancair <lancair [at] USTEK.COM>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [LML]
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 15:29:39 -0400
To: <lml>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Klaus,

 

Steve Hanson of Redmond Air set my engine and he is out of town so I cannot answer the timing questions until next week.  Last night I flew aabout 45 min and shut down.  With the engine stopped the angle read 3.6 degrees, the RPM was 360+/- and the MP was 23+/-.  I cycled the avionics master and "mags" off and back on - the firing angle went to 1- - - - but the other 2 gave the same readings as above.  The Grand Rapids EIS at the time showed MP of about 26, RPM zero.  

 

You said to set the altimeter to zero which I just realized that I did not do.  The field elevation is 3070 ft and the alt setting was 30.08.  It it important to the EI that I set my 2 altimeters to SL?  

 

Robert M. Simon

Cell 614-214-9087

 



________________________________



From: Lancair Mailing List on behalf of Klaus Savier

Sent: Fri 8/11/2006 1:25 AM

To: Lancair Mailing List

Subject: [LML]







Regarding your info you published on the Lancair list:

 The manual for the Plasma CDI asks that the timing is verified with a strobe light before flight.

What numbers did you see when you did this test and how did they differ from the display?

With your engine not running, altimeter set to 0 ft altitude, what does your MP indicate on each instrument?









Regards,

Klaus Savier

Light Speed Engineering

P.O. Box 549

416 E. Santa Maria St. #15

Santa Paula, CA 93060

klaus [at] lightspeedengineering.com

Tel: (805) 933-3299  Fax: (805) 525-0199

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 15:23:17 -0400
To: <lml>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
I have an Advanced Flight systems AF-2500 Engine
Monitoring unit for sale.
Please email for additional details.
Craig Blitzer
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com

 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:48:32 -0400
To: <lml>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Sometime ago, a post was sent that included a
picture which was apparently a homemade set of stairs used to get into the
cockpit without stepping on the wing.
Can who-ever posted/built that re-post
please.
I thought it was a fantastic idea and would like to
build one myself.
Thanks
Craig Blitzer
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: John Schroeder <jschroeder [at] perigee.net>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML]
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2006 07:46:39 -0400
To: <lml>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Craig -



It wasn't my idea. I copied from Mark Steitle (his picture attached), but I built a stand pretty much like the posting & picture describe. Works great for both entry and as a place to put tools and a fan whilst working inside. (Second Picture)



John





On Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:48:32 -0400, cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com> wrote:


Sometime ago, a post was sent that included a picture which was apparently a homemade set of stairs used to get into the cockpit without stepping on the wing.

Can who-ever posted/built that re-post please.

I thought it was a fantastic idea and would like to build one myself.

Thanks

Craig Blitzer

cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com







--

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Rob Logan <rob [at] logan.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 14:25:00 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancair.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

here is another way to put a vortec supercharger on

a io-550, this time in a sr-22

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 22:30:41 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Can someone please tell me what the torque
specs are for the engine mounting bolts? (where mounts attaches to
firewall)
Thanks
Craig B.
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com

 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Ian Crowe <ian.crowe [at] sympatico.ca>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML]
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 13:51:27 -0400
To: <lml>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
I used the lower end of the range for bolts of that
size.  If you need the actual values I can get them from my AME's reference
book when I go to the hangar next, probably tomorrow.  Let me know. These
are bolts that need to be checked regularly, rather like the bolts for a wooden
prop.  The material being clamped is wood and is more compressible than
metal and the bolt can become loose leading to cycling of the bolt and probably
fatigue.  Worse than that it is a progressive situation as the looser it
gets the looser it gets!  If you see what I mean.  The same situation
can occur with the main spar bolts.
 
Ian B. Crowe
LNC 2  C-FKRO
----- Original Message -----
From:
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com (cblitzer)

To: lml [at] lancaironline.net (Lancair Mailing List)

Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 8:30
PM
Subject: [LML]

Can someone please tell me what the torque
specs are for the engine mounting bolts? (where mounts attaches to
firewall)
Thanks
Craig B.
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com

 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: cblitzer <cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re:
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 20:20:44 -0400
To: <lml>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Ian,
If you have the actual values that would be
great.
I spoke woith Pat at Lancair tech support yesterday
and he told me the torque settin was 40 pounds.
Thanks
Craig
----- Original Message -----
To: lml [at] lancaironline.net (Lancair Mailing List)

Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 1:51
PM
Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] [LML]
Re:

I used the lower end of the range for bolts of
that size.  If you need the actual values I can get them from my AME's
reference book when I go to the hangar next, probably tomorrow.  Let me
know. These are bolts that need to be checked regularly, rather like the bolts
for a wooden prop.  The material being clamped is wood and is more
compressible than metal and the bolt can become loose leading to cycling of
the bolt and probably fatigue.  Worse than that it is a progressive
situation as the looser it gets the looser it gets!  If you see what I
mean.  The same situation can occur with the main spar
bolts.
 
Ian B. Crowe
LNC 2  C-FKRO
----- Original Message -----
From:
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com (cblitzer)

To: lml [at] lancaironline.net (Lancair Mailing List)

Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 8:30
PM
Subject: [LML]

Can someone please tell me what the torque
specs are for the engine mounting bolts? (where mounts attaches to
firewall)
Thanks
Craig B.
cblitzer [at] triad.rr.com

 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: jon hadlich <hackmo15 [at] hotmail.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 10:01:13 -0500
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

RE: LED'S

First, if you applied 12V to the white wire, you will put the LED in the "dim" mode. I have never had anyone complain about not being able to see these. Ray Allen also makes a needle indicator that will replace the LED type easily.

Good Luck

Jon Hadlich

Installer



_________________________________________________________________

Turn searches into helpful donations. Make your search count. http://click4thecause.live.com/search/charity/default.aspx?source=hmemtagline_donation&FORM=WLMTAG

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: <flyer439 [at] bellsouth.net>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 16:52:50 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Kai:  Please send me the name of the source you used for the induction air on your engine as shown on your mail of 8/8/07.  It shows alternate air also.  Please e-mail me direct at flyer439 [at] bellsouth.net

.  Thanks in advance.         Tom Rohling

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Dominic V Crain <domcrain [at] tpg.com.au>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 10:03:34 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

 

Mike Aarons

 

Perth

Down Under

 

Mike,

 

I’m coming over to Busselton in CZJ –
be there Tuesday Sub Wx. Are you in that area?

If so would like to catch up.

Cheers

Dom Crain

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Scotty G <warbirdaeropress [at] cox.net>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 14:47:34 -0500
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Grayhawk wrote:



It is possible to put a 390 in an LNC2 (one raced at Reno) and even turbo charge it.  Some care is required when operating at the edge of the design performance envelope.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Were you thinking of my airplane? It has the Superior XP-400, and I fully agree with what you said. Maybe "lots" of care.





Scotty G

LightAndLift.com

Warbird Digest Magazine

WarbirdAeroPress.com

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: <Sky2high [at] aol.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML]
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:56:53 -0500
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Scotty G
 
Yes I was.  I forgot you stuffed another 10 ci into the fire
breather.
 
Maybe you can illuminate us with your derived wisdom about "lots"
of care. 
 
Grayhawk the timid
 
In a message dated 2/18/2008 1:47:50 P.M. Central Standard Time,
warbirdaeropress [at] cox.net writes:

It is
possible to put a 390 in an LNC2 (one raced at Reno) and even turbo charge
it.  Some care is required when operating at the edge of the design
performance envelope.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Were
you thinking of my airplane? It has the Superior XP-400, and I fully agree
with what you said. Maybe "lots" of
care.





Delicious ideas to please the pickiest eaters. Watch the video on AOL Living.

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Dominic V Crain <domcrain [at] tpg.com.au>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [LML] Re:
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:20:13 -0500
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Grayhawk the timid

 

Any relation to Robin the Hood?

 

 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: <Sky2high [at] aol.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re:
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:51:06 -0500
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Both steal small
amounts of time.
 
In a message dated 2/20/2008 2:22:00 P.M. Central Standard Time,
domcrain [at] tpg.com.au writes:

Grayhawk
the
timid

Any relation to Robin the
Hood?





Delicious ideas to please the pickiest eaters. Watch the video on AOL Living.

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Dominic V Crain <domcrain [at] tpg.com.au>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [LML] Re:
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 10:46:14 -0500
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Both steal small amounts of time.

Point Taken

 

 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: <marv [at] lancair.net>
Subject: Re:
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 08:55:46 -0400
To: <lml>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Posted for "Jim Malach" <jim [at] malach.com>:



 I am flying to Sedona on Wed. the 18 of June in my IV-P.

 Does anyone know of any hanger space available for 3 nights?

 Thanks.

 

 Jim

 N89GG

 

 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Art Bertolina <artbertolina [at] earthlink.net>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re:
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 21:14:47 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Jim

are you going over to see Jim Hergert.  I have a hanger

there with an airport car in it but I'm in So. Cal don't how

to get you the key

----- Original Message ----- From: <marv [at] lancair.net>

To: <lml>

Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 5:55 AM

Subject: [LML] Re:




Posted for "Jim Malach" <jim [at] malach.com>:



 I am flying to Sedona on Wed. the 18 of June in my IV-P.

 Does anyone know of any hanger space available for 3 nights?

 Thanks.

 Jim

 N89GG



--

For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Mike Custard <mike [at] advancedaviationinc.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 13:30:35 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

We have a new
Andair Fuel Selector part # 597-A (Lancair part #).  This fuel selector is for
the Continental TSIO-550 with fuel return. Retails for $515.00, will sell for
$325.00 plus shipping.

 

Mike Custard

Advanced Aviation, Inc

541 330-5817

 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: William Oprendek <billo520 [at] commspeed.net>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 07:58:36 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Have a set of Legacy wheel and brakes for
sale.
26 hrs.
$400.00
Contact Bill Oprendek
billo520 [at] commspeed.net





E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (5.5.1.322)
Database version: 5.10180e
http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor/

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Bruce <bstrat1 [at] cox.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 11:49:38 -0700
To: Lancair Mailing List <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Looking for a ride (as an expense sharing pax) to
OSH and back.
 
 
Bruce Stratton
Santa Barbara, CA
805-969-2361
bstrat1 [at] cox.net

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Halle, John <JJHALLE [at] stoel.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 21:49:45 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Terrence wrote"

 

"In other words, lets evaluate the designs rather than carp on more and more

training .... this group is fraught with very qualified pilots, and they are

having accidetns.  The cause, imho, is likely elsewhere."



Just wondering how he reaches the conclusion that we are, as a group including the accident pilots, very qualified when no evidence supports it.  Without even getting into the judgment issue, where all of the evidence suggests that the group referenced above is woefully deficient, Jeff's statistics show beyond any doubt that inadequate qualification in type is the most obvious common trait driving the accident statistics.



Technology is a marvelous thing  but it is not a substitute for training or judgment.



(I do wholeheartedly agree that the word "fraught" is apt, however.)

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: terrence o'neill <troneill [at] charter.net>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML]
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:14:20 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

John,

Define 'qualified' as pssing the FAA's touted Flight Check every two years. This is just a complex airplane, imho.

It has been improved, for example, with vortex generators. More improvements are certainly possible.

Terrence







Terrence wrote"



"In other words, lets evaluate the designs rather than carp on more and more

training .... this group is fraught with very qualified pilots, and they are

having accidetns.  The cause, imho, is likely elsewhere."



Just wondering how he reaches the conclusion that we are, as a group including the accident pilots, very qualified when no evidence supports it. Without even getting into the judgment issue, where all of the evidence suggests that the group referenced above is woefully deficient, Jeff's statistics show beyond any doubt that inadequate qualification in type is the most obvious common trait driving the accident statistics.



Technology is a marvelous thing  but it is not a substitute for training or judgment.



(I do wholeheartedly agree that the word "fraught" is apt, however.)







--

For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html





No virus found in this incoming message

Checked by PC Tools AntiVirus (4.0.0.26 - 10.072.012).

http://www.pctools.com/free-antivirus/ No virus found in this outgoing message

Checked by PC Tools AntiVirus (4.0.0.26 - 10.072.012).

http://www.pctools.com/free-antivirus/

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Jon Socolof <jsocolof [at] ershire.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 23:11:30 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Jeff,

 

I do apologize for the tone of my original post; it was not
my intention to flame. The video was taken at an airport in the middle of
no-where, surrounded by open farm lands. Our activities were coordinated with
the airport manager, tower personnel and local parachute jump school prior to
the flight. I’m sorry you don’t really understand the rules that
apply and cited the wrong FAR in the situation in the video. “Touch and Go
Stop and Go, Low Approach (Practice Low Approach)” and “cleared for
the option” are absolutely legal and as in this case authorized. See Section
4-8-12. BTW there was no flying over any houses. I’m sure as a Designated
Examiner you use these authorized approaches all the time for training purposes.

 

Jon

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: <vtailjeff [at] aol.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML]
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 11:26:08 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Jon,



You are such a bull shit artist! Your video was shot at the Sussex, NJ airport in spite of your video's mispelling the name of the airport as "Sussux". There is no FAA tower located there so there can be no tower clearance. Check www.airnav.com. You must have been hearing voices when you heard the tower clearance you claim you received. Hint, 122.7 is not "tower". As to the houses you claim are not there, you must be blind as well. Watch your video--the houses you flew over are the small rectanulgar structures. You can see them on google earth as well. As to all the "open farmland"-- that would be correct if it were not for the town of Sussex and its subdivisions located less than a half mile from the runway.



No flame intended-- just facts. ;)



Jeff







-----Original Message-----

From: Jon Socolof <jsocolof [at] ershire.com>

To: lml [at] lancaironline.net

Sent: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 10:11 pm

Subject: [LML]


Jeff,
 
I do apologize for the tone of my original post; it was not my intention to flame. The video was taken at an airport in the middle of no-where, surrounded by open farm lands. Our activities were coordinated with the airport manager, tower personnel and local parachute jump school prior to the flight. I’m sorry you don’t really understand the rules that apply and cited the wrong FAR in the situation in the video. “Touch and Go Stop and Go, Low Approach (Practice Low Approach)” and “cleared for the option” are absolutely legal and as in this case authorized. See Section 4-8-12. BTW there was no flying over any houses. I’m sure as a Designated Examiner you use these authorized approaches all the time for training purposes.
 
Jon

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: F. Barry Knotts <bknotts [at] buckeye-express.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML]
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 09:18:12 -0500
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

I'm a IV-P builder and read the LML daily.  New building ideas pop up
fairly often. Since I've been building and reading since 2002 I've
covered a lot of territory and benefited greatly.  I've had many
questions answered.  Some before I asked.  I have a special folder in
my mail client where I stash stuff that looks like it could be useful
in the future.  That way it's easier to find than when I do a search of
the archives.  A lot of it is IV-P specific, but there is also info
about building in general.



But the LML is not the only source I have.  I call Lancair.  I talk to
Robert, Tim, Ben, Gary and all.  I have found that there is a real
benefit to establishing communications with the "mother ship."  They
are also the best source of info about updated parts, proper parts, and
new fastbuild parts. They also have .pdf instructions for new segments
of the build, eg. the new seats, the new aileron bellcrank box, etc.



One of my best building resources has been a CD that Bob Pastusek
burned for me.  It's got loads of pictures of his progress in building
two IV-P's.  I have really picked his brain on occasion and even made a
pilgrimage to his hanger during his build.  He is a master engineer and
builder.  I haven't done everything his way, but where I haven't, I
have had to think long and hard about why do it any other way.



I've kept a very extensive photo collection of my project .  I'd be
happy to share it on a website if I knew where to put it.  Warning:
there are a lot of high resolution photos, and I haven't even bonded
top to bottom yet or completed the vertical stab/rudder.  But pictures
say more than a thousand words (sometimes) and answer many questions. 
I'll bet a photo album could be linked to an electronic copy of the
IV-P builders manual.  (If we had one.)



Now the question.  Do we have a stable server for photo albums that are
project specific?  That is, is there a IV-P builders on-line photo
source?  I've seen a couple of ES on-line photo albums, but not a lot
on IV-Ps.  Would Lancair host it?  Would LML host it?  Does it already
exist, and I just haven't seen it?



Inquiring minds......



Barry Knotts

IV-P, Conti TSIO-550 builder

Perrysburg, Ohio



Stan Fields wrote:

list-3303193 [at] logan.com" rel="noopener" type="cite">

Hello All,

 

I've been a long time
"lml listener" and last February I bought a Legacy RG project. I have
looked at as many builder's logs as I can find and joined all
the forums as well. There isn't a lot of builder chat anywhere that I
can find. 

 


Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Stan Fields <sdfields [at] austin.rr.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: [LML]
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:24:37 -0500
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
That's a great idea Berry. Expercraft has a
website, mostly for smaller projects, that offers free builders log software and
repository for building photos. 
 http://www.expercraft.com/  Vendors
pay for the site in exchange for their links and some advertisements. It
would be great if there LML could offer a similar destination site for all of
its builders. A picture is often invaluable and ultimately we all need a
Builder's Log.
 
Stan
#201 L2K/RG
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:
bknotts [at] buckeye-express.com (F. Barry Knotts)

To: lml [at] lancaironline.net

Sent: Monday, November 17, 2008 8:18
AM
Subject: [LML] Re: [LML]

I'm a IV-P builder and read the LML daily.  New building
ideas pop up fairly often. Since I've been building and reading since 2002
I've covered a lot of territory and benefited greatly.  I've had many
questions answered.  Some before I asked.  I have a special folder
in my mail client where I stash stuff that looks like it could be useful in
the future.  That way it's easier to find than when I do a search of the
archives.  A lot of it is IV-P specific, but there is also info about
building in general.

But the LML is not the only source I have.  I
call Lancair.  I talk to Robert, Tim, Ben, Gary and all.  I have
found that there is a real benefit to establishing communications with the
"mother ship."  They are also the best source of info about updated
parts, proper parts, and new fastbuild parts. They also have .pdf instructions
for new segments of the build, eg. the new seats, the new aileron bellcrank
box, etc.

One of my best building resources has been a CD that Bob
Pastusek burned for me.  It's got loads of pictures of his progress in
building two IV-P's.  I have really picked his brain on occasion and even
made a pilgrimage to his hanger during his build.  He is a master
engineer and builder.  I haven't done everything his way, but where I
haven't, I have had to think long and hard about why do it any other
way.

I've kept a very extensive photo collection of my project . 
I'd be happy to share it on a website if I knew where to put it. 
Warning: there are a lot of high resolution photos, and I haven't even bonded
top to bottom yet or completed the vertical stab/rudder.  But pictures
say more than a thousand words (sometimes) and answer many questions. 
I'll bet a photo album could be linked to an electronic copy of the IV-P
builders manual.  (If we had one.)

Now the question.  Do we
have a stable server for photo albums that are project specific?  That
is, is there a IV-P builders on-line photo source?  I've seen a couple of
ES on-line photo albums, but not a lot on IV-Ps.  Would Lancair host
it?  Would LML host it?  Does it already exist, and I just haven't
seen it?

Inquiring minds......

Barry Knotts
IV-P, Conti
TSIO-550 builder
Perrysburg, Ohio

Stan Fields wrote:

list-3303193 [at] logan.com" rel="noopener" type="cite">

Hello All,

I've been a long time "lml
listener" and last February I bought a Legacy RG project. I have
looked at as many builder's logs as I can find and joined all
the forums as well. There isn't a lot of builder chat anywhere that I
can find. 


Submitted by Anonymous on

From: <flypetezacc [at] aol.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 19:43:25 -0500
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

Hello All,



To address some of the issues presented over the last few weeks I will begin with the insurance:



Many years ago there was limited insurance available for Lancairs especially the IV's.  AIG responded to Lancairs request for insurance by requesting/demanding  standardized training.  AIG's program was created for Lancair it was not a replacement of an existing insurance program but a new one. Back in the day, the training was a collection of instructors throughout the country allegedly working from a syllabus created by the factory.  Some adhered to the syllabus, some did 20-30 landings and other CFI's flew around to get lunch with their students.  When HPAT came on board we required that we would create a standard of Checklists, Procedures, IFR checkout standards, a syllabus, SOP's for our instructors etc.  We created all of that, all instructors a CD that is copyrighted with all of the above and more.  I sent the CD with a return receipt to ensure it was received.  Those receiving training were appreciative and AIG audited the program for some time.  We also followed up with each client to discuss the training after the fact and continue to Mentor and offer assistance where able.  The program has evolved over the years.



Without our Lancair training program there would not be AIG insurance.  AIG did not want independents doing their own program, nor did London or USAIG.  We did not create that scenario it was created by the high accident rates many years ago.



The other root cause in the insurance malady is not just fatal accidents from people that have not received formal training, it's the extremely high number of claims.  Claims that are excessive for the damage done.  Planes that have been written off when they could have easily been repaired for 50k instead of a 300k write off.



The Instructor Issue:



We have had many requests from independent CFI's to join the team and in the past we have sought them out ourselves.  After long discussions and emails not all of the independent instructors were suitable for program. Some did not want to commit to flying 10+ days per month, some did not agree with standardized training and many other reasons including them not being qualified.  We look for 3 out 4 prerequisites to be met. Time in Lancairs, flight time as an instructor, time in high performance aircraft, and aerobatic experience.  There are exceptions i.e. a CFI with 500 hours given in Lancairs.  When we were short instructors it certainly was tempting to bring on an unqualified CFI but we chose not to and instead the full time CFI's flew 27 out of 30 days and we asked the part timers to fly more. 



All of our instructors operate according to our standards, our standard operating procedures (Which anyone can have a copy), our checklists and reporting procedure and forms.  When I have, in the past, discovered a CFI that has not adhered to the HPAT program I have discussed the matter with the individual and if they are unwilling to operate within the standards they cannot be a part of our team.  Usually when professionals disagree with a method or practice, but 2 parties discuss the matter someone comes out with a better understanding or information.  Some dissenting instructors in the past never asked to change the syllabus, offer assistance, or discuss a difference as a professional.  It is an underlying philosophy welcoming change and improvement that makes an organization improve and evolve in the right direction. This is why we follow up with students to find out what they performed and learned during training.  All current instructors receive recurrent training and continuing education within HPAT.  For example, unusual attitude training in a high performance aircraft. 



One of my comments to Lancair owners that have called me looking for training has always been to get training from a qualified CFI.  It does not have to be HPAT, if insurance is not involved which often it is not for most Lancair owners, it can be a qualified independent that has the right experience and a standard program. I have even offered them to use our FAA approved syllabus if necessary as a guide.  I also encourage them to interview their CFI and determine some basics as to their qualifications.  It amazes me every time I learn of a non-CFI teaching in a Lancair.  Not a good idea for lots of reasons.



The Syllabus:



The syllabus is not magical nor is it a root problem.  It's a lack of a syllabus, lack of adherence, lack of formal training and lack of an internal audit to assure its adherence.  We have always treated training in Lancairs like a Type rating course and not a Cirrus type program. Our syllabus has been on our web site for years and only recently have we pulled it off and now send it to each client beginning in 2009 when they register.



Our Schedule:



First, I want to thank all of those in the past that were patient while we transitioned through an extremely difficult time for HPAT, for a myriad of reasons.  We were scheduling a month out and short staffed.  That is all a thing of the past.  Glenda is full time 0800-1700 eastern M-F and reachable at 727-524-9300 as well as glenda [at] HP-AT.com

.  If anyone has a scheduling issue in 2009 call me directly at 908-391-2001 or Peter [at] HP-AT.com (Peter [at] HP-AT.com)

.



LOBO:



...is not an issue... but an advocacy group for Lancair as told to me by two of their founders.  We allowed them to make an announcement at our Napa ground school.  I would not have done that if I thought it was a bad idea.  We were invited to attend a meeting with 1 months notice. A reasonable amount of time.  However, Josh and I responded as to whether the dates could be changed and neither of us received a reply.  I asked Jeff Edwards a week before for a call in phone number, in the hope I could phone in.  However my flying prevented me from calling and none of us were going to cancel our clients that were scheduled weeks prior to the meetings announcement.  Sometimes things just don't work out for the schedule.  We wanted to be there.



The root problem:



As a small number of you know I am very passionate and sincere in our quest to provide formal training to the Lancair community.  There are so many reasons why people do not get training.  From personal to...personal reasons.  I will offer this  again, if someone legitimately cannot afford training, call me directly and explain the scenario to me, there are many people that I have personally provided training for that was Pro Bono.  I am also prepared to share our Lancair cost structure with any individual and demonstrate where and why the costs are what the are.  We have overhead that is far higher than an independant instructors, we train full time, all of us work hard for our customers.  Call or email me directly for a brief discussion.



A few weeks ago we did a spin training and basic aerobatic course for 8 pilots and we charged nothing for the instruction and the 2007 Decathlon we used for the flight portion.  Why, the 8 pilots all had reasons for the no charge training and I know it will keep 8 people safer.



The root problem is getting the message out to those that think they do not need training.  43% of the accidents are people with less than 100 hours in type.  But, there is a very large number of accidents from people with 5000-20000 hours.  The ease of receiving training has never been easier I implore those that do not need training to get it anyway!



Grassroots effort. Go down the hangar row and let the lancair pilot know why its important to get training from ANY qualified instructor. help make 2009 the safest year for Lancair pilots.


Thank you,



Peter Zaccagnino

HP-AT.com, Inc

1046 River Ave

Flemington, NJ 08822

908 391 2001

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: <flypetezacc [at] aol.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 07:42:46 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
Hello Everyone,



Spring is upon is and I want everyone to think of Thunderstorms, but do not forget about icing, every year, not just the bad years, we lose an airplane to Thunderstorms.  Unfortunately the message does not get to everyone in the community, so please pass along some caution to all of your friends that fly high performance airplanes whether high time pilots or not.  There are plenty of statistics with fatal accidents at the hands of pilots with over 10,000 hours as well as under 100 hours.



Over 25 percent of fatal weather-related General Aviation accidents are attributed to thunderstorms.  To make matters worse, high performance aircraft often fly at altitudes that put them in the worst of weather.


The three thunderstorm categories based on causal source types are:



Air mass thunderstorms

Often occurring on warm afternoons in late Spring, Summer and early20Fall, air mass thunderstorms are the result of the sun’s heating of the earth’s surface and the resulting rising column of warm air. Often isolated, you may be able to maneuver around them.



Frontal thunderstorms

Caused by a cold front pushing into a warmer air mass with lots of moisture, frontal thunderstorms are difficult, if not impossible to circumnavigate.



Squall lines

Squall lines are often characterized by narrow bands of convection, heavy rainfall, and intense winds and shear. They usually occur ahead of a cold front.



Embedded thunderstorms

Embedded thunderstorms are thunderstorms hidden in solid masses of other clouds. These storms can sometimes be avoided by climbing on top of the cloud layer and watching for buildups, or by staying low (if ceilings and visibilities permit) and navigating around columns of rain. IMC Flight without thunderstorm detection ability and relying on datalink weather, which can have 1 hour 30 minute delays, can have fatal consequences.  You need to have 100% knowledge that there are no embedded thunderstorms or turn around or land.

Radar works through line-of-sight, similar to a VOR. On the East coast, radar coverage is very good and the returns from altitudes at which thunderstorms develop is excellent. In mountainous areas the limitations of radar can be a factor. Because radar works through line-of-sight it cannot see over or around mountains. R
adar sites located on mountaintops, which can be over 8,000 msl, may 'overshoot' precipitation. Keep in mind that a radar return with no precipitation echoes (no returns) does not mean that there is no significant weather, as clouds and fog are not detected by the radar. However, when echoes are present, turbulence can be implied by the intensity of the precipitation, and icing is implied by the presence of the precipitation at temperatures at or below zero degrees Celsius.
Regarding precipitation and turbulence, look at (or ask ATC) how far apart the different levels of precipitation are from each other. This difference is called the gradient. Just like with isobars—the closer they are together, the more turbulent the ride. Precipitation gradient is also a good indicator of turbulence. Rule of thumb: the closer the precipitation levels are together, the more turbulence expected.
For more information on thunderstorm avoidance and turbulence around convective activity, read section 7-1-29 of the AIM.
The following thunderstorm levels were established by the National Weather Service and are based on measurements from the Vid
eo Integrator and Processor, or VIP. VIP contours radar reflectivity in dBZ.

 

New Terminology

dBZ

Rain Fall/Hour

 
Light

18-29

.01" to .10"

 
Moderate

30-40

=0
A
.175" to .50"

 
Heavy

40-50

.50" to 2.0"

 
Extreme

50+

2.0" to 16+"

 

 

During fair weather, Weather and Radar Processor, WARP receives NEXRAD updates every 9-11 minutes. When precipitation is detected NEXRAD automatically switches to "precipitation mode" and updates more frequently (Generally, at least every 4-6 minutes).  WARP does NOT display light precipitation.

 

ATC's primary purpose is to separate IFR aircraft. Other services, such as VFR flight following and basic weather information, are provided on a workload-permitting basis.

Don't be confused by the terminology. Approach Control facilities and consolidated TRACONs offer the same services and have the same weather radar equipment.
One critical exception, however, is delay time.  WARP can be up to 10-12 minutes old, where ASR approach controllers have near real time weather images.  This difference, if relied on, could prove fatal.
Center Abbreviation

Center Name

ZAB

Albuquerque

ZAN

Anchorage

ZAU

Chicago

ZBW

Boston

ZDC

Washington

ZDV

Denver

ZFW

Dallas-Ft Worth

ZHN

Honolulu

ZHU

Houston

ZID


Indianapolis

ZJX

Jacksonville

ZKC

Kansas City

ZLA

Los Angeles

ZLC

Salt Lake City

ZMA

Miami

ZME

Memphis

ZMP

Minneapolis

ZNY

New York

ZOA

Oakland

ZOB

Cleveland

ZSE

Seattle

ZTL

Atlanta

 

 

As PIC you are responsible and need to be aware of FAR 91.123, PIC authority and how it relates to weather avoidance and other safety concerns:
Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.

(a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory. However, except in Class A airspace, a pilot may cancel an IFR flight plan if the operation is being conducted in VFR weather conditions. When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC.



(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an
aircraft contrary to an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.



(c) Each pilot in command who, in an emergency, or in response to a traffic alert and collision avoidance system resolution advisory, deviates from an ATC clearance or instruction shall notify ATC of that deviation as soon as possible.



(d) Each pilot in command who (though not deviating from a rule of this subpart) is given priority by ATC in an emergency, shall submit a detailed report of that emergency within 48 hours to the manager of that ATC facility, if requested by ATC.



(e) Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, no person operating an aircraft may operate that aircraft according to any clearance or instruction that has been issued to the pilot of another aircraft for radar air traffic control purposes.
FAA recommendations:

The Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM)  section, 7-1-30 has information regarding thunderstorm avoidance. Below is an excerpt from the AIM.

Thunderstorm Flying

a. Above all, remember this: never regard any thunderstorm "lightly" even when radar observers report the echoes are of light intensity. Avoiding thunderstorms is the best policy. Following are some Do's and Don'ts of thunderstorm avoidance:

1. Don't land or takeoff in the face of an approaching thunderstorm. A sudden gust front of low level turbulence could cause loss of control.

2. Don't attempt to fly under a thunde
rstorm even if you can see through to the other side. Turbulence and wind shear under the storm could be disastrous.

3. Don't fly without airborne radar into a cloud mass containing scattered embedded thunderstorms. Scattered thunderstorms not embedded usually can be visually circumnavigated.

4. Don't trust the visual appearance to be a reliable indicator of the turbulence inside a thunderstorm.

5. Do avoid any thunderstorm by at least 20 miles.

6. Do clear the top of a known or suspected severe thunderstorm by at least 1,000 feet altitude for each 10 knots of wind speed at the cloud top. This should exceed the altitude capability of most aircraft.

7. Do circumnavigate the entire area if the area has 6/10 thunderstorm coverage.

8. Do remember that vivid and frequent lightning indicates the probability of a strong thunderstorm.

9. Do regard as extremely hazardous any thunderstorm with tops 35,000 feet or=2
0higher whether the top is visually sighted or determined by radar.

10. Turn up cockpit lights to highest intensity to lessen temporary blindness from lightning.

11. If using automatic pilot, disengage altitude hold mode and speed hold mode. The automatic altitude and speed controls will increase maneuvers of the aircraft thus increasing structural stress.

12. If using airborne radar, tilt the antenna up and down occasionally. This will permit you to detect other thunderstorm activity at altitudes other than the one being flown.

The FAA says:

If you cannot avoid penetrating a thunderstorm, following are some Do's before entering the storm:

1. Tighten your safety belt, put on your shoulder harness if you have one and secure all loose objects.

2. Plan and hold your course to take you through the storm in a minimum time.

3. To avoid the most critical icing, establish a penetration altitude below the freezing level or above the level of minus 15 degrees Celsius.

4. Verify that pitot heat is on and turn on carburetor heat or jet engine anti-ice. Icing can be rapid at any altitude and cause almost instantaneous power failure and/or loss of airspeed indication.

5. Establish power settings for turbulence penetration airspeed recommended in your aircraft manual.

6. Turn up cockpit lights to highest intensity to lessen temporary blindness from lightning.

7. If using automatic pilot, disengage altitude hold mode and speed hold mode. The automatic altitude and speed controls will increase maneuvers of the aircraft thus increasing structural stress.

8. If using airborne radar, tilt the antenna up and down occasionally. This will permit you to detect other thunderstorm activity at altitudes other than the one being flown.

Following are some Do's and Don'ts during the thunderstorm penetration:

1. Do keep your eyes on your instru
ments. Looking outside the cockpit can increase danger of temporary blindness from lightning.

2. Don't change power settings; maintain settings for the recommended turbulence penetration airspeed.

3. Don't attempt to maintain constant altitude; let the aircraft "ride the waves."

4. Don't turn back once you are in the thunderstorm. A straight course through the storm most likely will get you out of the hazards most quickly. In addition, turning maneuvers increase stress on the aircraft.

Whatever you do, assure that you are not flying into an area of thunderstorms.  The consequences are extreme.  The question to be asked is how will a Lancair perform below Va in extreme Turbulence? 







Thank you,



Peter Zaccagnino

HP-AT.com, Inc

Peter [at] hp-at.com

1046 River Ave

Flemington, NJ 08822

908 391 2001

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: <n427jb [at] bellsouth.net>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 11:43:34 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message
The incident Bill Edwards describes lacks certain information that I believe would be important for those interested in "the rest of the story."  Mr. Edwards aircraft did not order the inspection, thus, Mr. Edwards was not financially responsible for the inspection.  That means that he is not entitled to a copy of the inspection report.  Lancair requires that the aircraft being inspected be located at a facility that maintains jacks sufficient to lift the aircraft for landing gear operation and inspection as well as other tools and materials that cannot be transported easily or economically to the inspection site.  The jacks and other equipment were available, and the aircraft was lifter using that equipment.  Mr. Edwards had a different style engine lifting point/pin and it is was this pin that failed during the retract proceedure.  The shifting weight of the aircraft was a major factor in the jack coming out of the non-standard jack points.  Irrespective of who purchased the inspection, or how the jack came out of the jack point, it is a fact that the jack came out of the jack point and, thankfully, produced only minor damage.  Since the damage was to be repaired, our inspector left the interior panels uninstalled.  When I heard of this incident, I advised that Lancair would send the inspector back to install the panels upon the repairs being made.  I even told the new owner that should he get the aircraft to Redmond, we would make the repairs there at no cost to him.
 
A lot has been said on the LML about nose struts.  I believe one lister got it right when he said that ESCO was still in business.  They are, however, they are no longer in the business of making nose struts.  These struts cannot easily be overhauled in the field.  There are many changes that were made to the strut over the years that they have been in service.  Some include an increased shaft wall thickness, self centering and improved shimmy dampning.  Shimmy is not exclusively a condition caused by the nose strut.  Many of you have correctly identified the other areas that must be examined before coming to the conclusion that the shimmy is caused by the condition of the strut.  Tire pressure and tire balance are at the top of the list of those things you must check.  If the shimmy has continued for a extended period of time, you must check the condition of the engine mount.  If the engine mount is damaged, you can be sure that it is contributing to the shimmy.....but it is not necessarily the underlying cause of the shimmy.  Yes, as Mr. Edwards has stated, I do have a small shimmy that exhibits itself on rollout.  I have the older ESCO strut.  My strut does need to be occasionally serviced with Nitrogen as they all do.  And yes, my strut has been overhauled to include the newer parts available through Lancair.
 
Keep in mind that Lancair did not willingly go into this insurance inspection business.  It was a requirement to maintain insurance for its customers.  Insurance is a necessary evil.  If you want it you have to do comply with the requirements established by AIG Insurance.  I don't like it but there it is!  Keep training, fly safely, and maybe our rates and these requirements will be lowered.
 
Joe 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Bill Edwards <wpedwards [at] hilgardhouse.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [LML]
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 19:56:57 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

I did not ask for a copy of the report, nor do I believe I am
entitled to one.  The Buyer, who is,  told me that he could not get one.

 

It was my opinion sitting in the cockpit riding the plane down,
and the FBO mechanic observing, that the lifting point pin was the last point
to fail after the starboard wing tip hit the hanger floor, and the jack shafts
went through the wing and  rear cockpit floor.   Both mains were on the hanger floor
when the nose wheel came down.  If the Lancair inspector believed that the FBO
lifting point pin and the jack points were unsafe, he had a duty to reject
them.   The damage to the wing on the exterior and to the rear foot well had
nothing to do with the interior panels, the pressurization cover,  the seats,
or the engine cowling.   In fact, the FBO mechanic installed them all and the
plane flew to Phoenix unpressurized with speed tape over the holes,  to be
repaired at Phoenix Composites.  I can only imagine what the Buyer thought of
the generous offer of repair if only he would fly the plane to Redmond.  The
time, hotel costs,  commercial fare back  to Phoenix and then up again to pick
it up,  and fuel costs would be more than the cost of repairs in Phoenix.

 

But of course, Mr. Bartels knows all of that.

 

From: Lancair Mailing
List [lml [at] lancaironline.net]">mailto:lml [at] lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of n427jb [at] bellsouth.net

Sent: 07/13/2009 8:44 AM

To: lml [at] lancaironline.net

Subject: [LML]

 

The incident Bill Edwards describes lacks certain
information that I believe would be important for those interested in "the
rest of the story."  Mr. Edwards aircraft did not order the
inspection, thus, Mr. Edwards was not financially responsible for the
inspection.  That means that he is not entitled to a copy of the
inspection report.  Lancair requires that the aircraft being inspected be
located at a facility that maintains jacks sufficient to lift the aircraft for landing
gear operation and inspection as well as other tools and materials that cannot
be transported easily or economically to the inspection site.  The jacks
and other equipment were available, and the aircraft was lifter using that
equipment.  Mr. Edwards had a different style engine lifting point/pin and
it is was this pin that failed during the retract proceedure.  The
shifting weight of the aircraft was a major factor in the jack coming out of
the non-standard jack points.  Irrespective of who purchased the
inspection, or how the jack came out of the jack point, it is a fact that the
jack came out of the jack point and, thankfully, produced only minor
damage.  Since the damage was to be repaired, our inspector left the
interior panels uninstalled.  When I heard of this incident, I advised
that Lancair would send the inspector back to install the panels upon the
repairs being made.  I even told the new owner that should he get the
aircraft to Redmond, we would make the repairs there at no cost to him.

 

A lot has been said on the LML about nose struts.  I
believe one lister got it right when he said that ESCO was still in
business.  They are, however, they are no longer in the business of making
nose struts.  These struts cannot easily be overhauled in the field. 
There are many changes that were made to the strut over the years that they
have been in service.  Some include an increased shaft wall thickness,
self centering and improved shimmy dampning.  Shimmy is not exclusively a
condition caused by the nose strut.  Many of you have correctly identified
the other areas that must be examined before coming to the conclusion that the
shimmy is caused by the condition of the strut.  Tire pressure and tire
balance are at the top of the list of those things you must check.  If the
shimmy has continued for a extended period of time, you must check the
condition of the engine mount.  If the engine mount is damaged, you can be
sure that it is contributing to the shimmy.....but it is not necessarily the underlying
cause of the shimmy.  Yes, as Mr. Edwards has stated, I do have a small
shimmy that exhibits itself on rollout.  I have the older ESCO
strut.  My strut does need to be occasionally serviced with Nitrogen as
they all do.  And yes, my strut has been overhauled to include the newer
parts available through Lancair.

 

Keep in mind that Lancair did not willingly go into this
insurance inspection business.  It was a requirement to maintain insurance
for its customers.  Insurance is a necessary evil.  If you want
it you have to do comply with the requirements established by
AIG Insurance.  I don't like it but there it is!  Keep
training, fly safely, and maybe our rates and these requirements will be
lowered.

 

Joe 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Michael D. Smith <mdpilot982 [at] gmail.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [LML]
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 19:56:57 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

I read Joes response with interest, just to see what Lancairs
response would be.  Somewhat disappointing but not unexpected.  While I don’t have
a complete grasp of all the minutia it seems that Lancair, if Lancair or the
agent of Lancair  were setting out to do an off site inspection prudence would suggest
they were required in fact to assure the jacks and lifting mechanism of
whatever type and the people involved were competent.  Ignorance is not a
strategy, nor is hope a reasonable strategy otherwise.  If there were concerns by
the experts beforehand, these should have been articulated.  Basic business and
relational stuff here.  Sounds like a captain of the ship doctrine applies here,
as it seems the scenario would play out that the final go no go word would fall
squarely on eth shoulders of the inspector expert.  No question the plane fell
off the jacks after things shifted and there were damages, but that was stating
the obvious.  What was not stated was who was responsible, and while Lancair
airplanes are heavenly, this was not an act of God.

 

Michael Smith

 

From: Lancair Mailing
List [lml [at] lancaironline.net]">mailto:lml [at] lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of n427jb [at] bellsouth.net

Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 10:44 AM

To: lml [at] lancaironline.net

Subject: [LML]

 

The incident Bill Edwards describes lacks certain
information that I believe would be important for those interested in "the
rest of the story."  Mr. Edwards aircraft did not order the
inspection, thus, Mr. Edwards was not financially responsible for the
inspection.  That means that he is not entitled to a copy of the inspection
report.  Lancair requires that the aircraft being inspected be located at
a facility that maintains jacks sufficient to lift the aircraft for landing
gear operation and inspection as well as other tools and materials that cannot
be transported easily or economically to the inspection site.  The jacks
and other equipment were available, and the aircraft was lifter using that
equipment.  Mr. Edwards had a different style engine lifting point/pin and
it is was this pin that failed during the retract proceedure.  The
shifting weight of the aircraft was a major factor in the jack coming out of
the non-standard jack points.  Irrespective of who purchased the
inspection, or how the jack came out of the jack point, it is a fact that the
jack came out of the jack point and, thankfully, produced only minor
damage.  Since the damage was to be repaired, our inspector left the
interior panels uninstalled.  When I heard of this incident, I advised
that Lancair would send the inspector back to install the panels upon the
repairs being made.  I even told the new owner that should he get the
aircraft to Redmond, we would make the repairs there at no cost to him.

 

Joe 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: Craig Gainza <cgainza [at] msn.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [LML] Re:
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 21:42:49 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

<if Lancair or the
agent of Lancair  were setting out to do an off site inspection prudence would suggest
they were required in fact to assure the jacks and lifting mechanism of
whatever type and the people involved were competent>

You have got to be kidding me!  Doesn't anyone ever take responsibility for their own actions anymore?  Frankly, it is amazing to me we can build our own airplanes at all.  Lancairs job here is not to hold our hands while we jack up our airplanes.  It is to inspect the airplane.  If the airplanes fall of my jacks or the FBO's jacks, it is the responsibility of whoever chose the equipment and technique (obviously bad)  to put it up there in the first place.  I don't let anyone jack up my airplane without me being present because I have done it 1000 times.  I know the best way to do it.  If the inspection is in my hangar I need to provide the adequate equipment to thoroughly test the aircraft and I am responsible. 

If you don't have the adequate equipment in your hangar, fly it to Redmond and have it done there.

Fix your airplane and get over it.

Jeez this is frustrating!!!

Craig Gainza



To: lml [at] lancaironline.net
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 19:56:57 -0400
From: mdpilot982 [at] gmail.com
Subject: [LML] Re:

I read Joes response with interest, just to see what Lancairs
response would be.  Somewhat disappointing but not unexpected.  While I don’t have
a complete grasp of all the minutia it seems that Lancair, if Lancair or the
agent of Lancair  were setting out to do an off site inspection prudence would suggest
they were required in fact to assure the jacks and lifting mechanism of
whatever type and the people involved were competent.  Ignorance is not a
strategy, nor is hope a reasonable strategy otherwise.  If there were concerns by
the experts beforehand, these should have been articulated.  Basic business and
relational stuff here.  Sounds like a captain of the ship doctrine applies here,
as it seems the scenario would play out that the final go no go word would fall
squarely on eth shoulders of the inspector expert.  No question the plane fell
off the jacks after things shifted and there were damages, but that was stating
the obvious.  What was not stated was who was responsible, and while Lancair
airplanes are heavenly, this was not an act of God.

 

Michael Smith

 

From: Lancair Mailing
List [lml [at] lancaironline.net]">mailto:lml [at] lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of n427jb [at] bellsouth.net

Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 10:44 AM

To: lml [at] lancaironline.net

Subject: [LML]

 

The incident Bill Edwards describes lacks certain
information that I believe would be important for those interested in "the
rest of the story."  Mr. Edwards aircraft did not order the
inspection, thus, Mr. Edwards was not financially responsible for the
inspection.  That means that he is not entitled to a copy of the inspection
report.  Lancair requires that the aircraft being inspected be located at
a facility that maintains jacks sufficient to lift the aircraft for landing
gear operation and inspection as well as other tools and materials that cannot
be transported easily or economically to the inspection site.  The jacks
and other equipment were available, and the aircraft was lifter using that
equipment.  Mr. Edwards had a different style engine lifting point/pin and
it is was this pin that failed during the retract proceedure.  The
shifting weight of the aircraft was a major factor in the jack coming out of
the non-standard jack points.  Irrespective of who purchased the
inspection, or how the jack came out of the jack point, it is a fact that the
jack came out of the jack point and, thankfully, produced only minor
damage.  Since the damage was to be repaired, our inspector left the
interior panels uninstalled.  When I heard of this incident, I advised
that Lancair would send the inspector back to install the panels upon the
repairs being made.  I even told the new owner that should he get the
aircraft to Redmond, we would make the repairs there at no cost to him.

 

Joe 

Submitted by Anonymous on

From: <vonjet [at] gmail.com>
Sender: <marv [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re:
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:37:29 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Message Header


Undecoded Message

I agree with Michael.
As a professional hired to do a job, you dont just show up to work in an airplane on someones jacks without checking the setup yourself. You have to check the basics.
You owe it to yourself and the person who hired you.
I wouldnt even lean on my Lancair before checking it if I walked in the hangar and my friend had already jacked it up.
Now, maybe the guy checked the setup and found it adequate. And maybe the owner said its fine, go ahead and get to work. In that case owner takes full responsibility.

Bryan

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

From: "Michael D. Smith"
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 19:56:57 -0400
To: <lml [at] lancaironline.net>
Subject: [LML] Re:

I read Joes response with interest, just to see what Lancairs response would be.  Somewhat disappointing but not unexpected.  While I don’t have a complete grasp of all the minutia it seems that Lancair, if Lancair or the agent of Lancair  were setting out to do an off site inspection prudence would suggest they were required in fact to assure the jacks and lifting mechanism of whatever type and the people involved were competent.  Ignorance is not a strategy, nor is hope a reasonable strategy otherwise.  If there were concerns by the experts beforehand, these should have been articulated.  Basic business and relational stuff here.  Sounds like a captain of the ship doctrine applies here, as it seems the scenario would play out that the final go no go word would fall squarely on eth shoulders of the inspector expert.  No question the plane fell off the jacks after things shifted and there were damages, but that was stating the obvious.  What was not stated was who was responsible, and while Lancair airplanes are heavenly, this was not an act of God.

 

Michael Smith

 

From: Lancair Mailing List [lml [at] lancaironline.net]">mailto:lml [at] lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of n427jb [at] bellsouth.net
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2009 10:44 AM
To: lml [at] lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML]

 

The incident Bill Edwards describes lacks certain information that I believe would be important for those interested in "the rest of the story."  Mr. Edwards aircraft did not order the inspection, thus, Mr. Edwards was not financially responsible for the inspection.  That means that he is not entitled to a copy of the inspection report.  Lancair requires that the aircraft being inspected be located at a facility that maintains jacks sufficient to lift the aircraft for landing gear operation and inspection as well as other tools and materials that cannot be transported easily or economically to the inspection site.  The jacks and other equipment were available, and the aircraft was lifter using that equipment.  Mr. Edwards had a different style engine lifting point/pin and it is was this pin that failed during the retract proceedure.  The shifting weight of the aircraft was a major factor in the jack coming out of the non-standard jack points.  Irrespective of who purchased the inspection, or how the jack came out of the jack point, it is a fact that the jack came out of the jack point and, thankfully, produced only minor damage.  Since the damage was to be repaired, our inspector left the interior panels uninstalled.  When I heard of this incident, I advised that Lancair would send the inspector back to install the panels upon the repairs being made.  I even told the new owner that should he get the aircraft to Redmond, we would make the repairs there at no cost to him.

 

Joe 

Pages