 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
lbmathias(at)verizon.net
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:24 am Post subject: Another New Lightning |
 |
|
Lightning Fans,
I am attaching a picture of N59JL which was ready to fly on Feb 3 except for meeting the requirement of inspection because the FAA has seen fit only to be a hindrance in the issuance of my permanent registration certificate.
Anyway, we ran the engine and I taxied it around SYI a bit to see how it felt. The panel powered up just fine and everything looks pretty good. B&B Auto Trim of Shelbyville will be putting in the interior in the next couple weeks; gear fairings and wheel pants will go on after we return to SYI with registration in hand. With the paint trim on the canopy and the spinner painted, I think it will look even better.
Anyway, we are now back home and awaiting the registration so we can return to SYI for inspection and flying.
Linda Mathias
| | - The Matronics Lightning-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pequeajim
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 708
Location: New Holland, PA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:37 am Post subject: Another New Lightning |
|
|
It looks beautiful Linda...
On 2/5/07, JOSEPH MATHIAS LINDA MATHIAS <lbmathias(at)verizon.net (lbmathias(at)verizon.net)> wrote: [quote] Lightning Fans,
I am attaching a picture of N59JL which was ready to fly on Feb 3 except for meeting the requirement of inspection because the FAA has seen fit only to be a hindrance in the issuance of my permanent registration certificate.
Anyway, we ran the engine and I taxied it around SYI a bit to see how it felt. The panel powered up just fine and everything looks pretty good. B&B Auto Trim of Shelbyville will be putting in the interior in the next couple weeks; gear fairings and wheel pants will go on after we return to SYI with registration in hand. With the paint trim on the canopy and the spinner painted, I think it will look even better.
Anyway, we are now back home and awaiting the registration so we can return to SYI for inspection and flying.
Linda Mathias
[b]
| | - The Matronics Lightning-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pete(at)flylightning.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 4:49 pm Post subject: Another New Lightning |
|
|
DAR Gary Meuer hands Rick Bowen his Experimental Amateur Built airworthiness certificate Monday evening Feb 12th. Congrats to Rick. After a weekend of hard work and final touches the Lightning passed inspection with no issues.
Photo 22 shows Rick’s Lightning in the foreground, Linda & Joe Mathias’ (yellow & red), the Lightning prototype, and in the corner Duane Sorenson’s. Duane’s is ready for inspection as soon as Duane can return to Shelbyville.
Pete
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim and Mary Young
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 3:31 PM
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Qualith of build and durability?
Seems like it would be good if you (or Nick) put your rebuttal on the homebuiltairplanes.com website under the same thread as the comments were made. Letting it stand unchallenged there only seems to give it a sense of legitimacy. Perhaps some of the other happy Lightning owners could also respond there. However, I realize time is an issue so if you can't it's understandable but unfortunate.
Jim Young
| Quote: |
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pete
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 3:53 PM
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Qualith of build and durability?
Hi All,
The internet is a great tool but sometimes there are some posts that really make me shake my head. The quote from the moderator of the www.homebuiltairplanes.com web site is another one of those. It always amazes me when someone sets himself up as a self proclaimed “expert” and then makes statements based on assumptions about photos posted on another site.
Sloppy? He first talks about wrinkles in the rudder skin. If he even had a cursory knowledge of composites he would know that the lines he sees are not wrinkles but the relief lines in the foam core that allow resin infusion. He would also know that a light scuffing with sand paper would make them disappear. The material was not bunched up. Nor was it separated from the tool. He makes assumptions without enough knowledge to make valid assumptions.
Second, he talks about the spar. He says that the combination of glass and carbon is “not recommended”. Well, he should tell that to Cirrus, Pulsar, Boeing, and others. Maybe they will change their wing construction to comply with this “expert”. If he tells Cessna right away maybe they can change their wing before the first of the “New Generation” aircraft are sold! He states that the carbon ends at the root rib when in actuality it extends on out the spar. You just can’t see it in the photo. Again, an “expert” making assumptions about items he can’t even see in a photo.
He questions the spar strength? On what basis? Maybe his vast knowledge of composites? We tested that wing to 11 G positive. Then we tested it to 11 G negative. Then in the high speed stall configuration. Photos of the test are on the web site. 95% of all aircraft wings in use today would not hold up to our test including Cessna, Piper, Mooney, Vans RV Series, Sonex, Zenith, and most others.
Finally, he doubts our performance numbers and thinks they are from an “analysis program” and he would prefer to see “[i]something that's a bit more accurate and flight proven”. [/i][i]Again he’s assuming we are not being forthright with our performance numbers. Well, those who know us and build with us know that we have not used “analysis programs” in the development of this aircraft. We built it the way we thought it should be built based on our experience over the last nearly 20 years building dozens of homebuilt aircraft. We put our own butt on the line and went out and flew it and reported the performance we saw. We prove it again every week by flying beside Vans RV-6 & 7’s and finding that we are faster when flown in the economy cruise mode. The RV’s will go faster if the pilots push the throttle to the 13 gph fuel use rate but at their 9.5 gph rate we are faster using our 5.5 gph. We even got to report first hand our glide ratio when Nick hit a turkey buzzard on the spinner and the prop shattered 7 miles away from the airport at 2500 ft above the ground and he had enough glide to get back to the airport and fly a std pattern! Maybe we’ll call that the Turkey Buzzard analysis program reporting a real life 17:1 glide.[/i][i][/i]
[i] [/i]
[i]To sum it up, when we listen to the comments of builders who have completed composite aircraft and really know what they are talking about, we are encouraged by what they say about our kit. We will get better yet as this year goes by and you can rest assured that we won’t be reporting performance we don’t see.[/i]
[i] [/i]
[i]Part of my reason for responding here is to illustrate that you can’t always believe the info posted on the net. Too often list members make observations and offer opinions and advise that is well out of their area of expertise. Maybe they did sleep at a Holiday Inn but still…… Call me old fashioned but I think authors should remember that the freedom that allows postings on some internet list should be accompanied by the responsibility to have some idea of what they are talking about.[/i]
[i] [/i]
[i]Pete[/i]
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of George SMith
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 8:47 AM
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Qualith of build and durability?
I am interesting in possibly purchasing the Lightning and have been surfing around the forums for information on the aircraft. Since it is so new, it is difficult to find many people who have experience with it. My concern is that I am need to research this well as spending this much money on a hobby is not well spent if I am not happy with my purchase 2-3 years down the line.
In reading one particular forum, I came across a couple of guys asking questions about the Lightning and one gentleman’s thoughts on the aircraft after visiting the Arion Aircraft web site.
[i]An interesting new airplane. I haven't heard of this one but they do show quite a bit at their web site to alloow me to make at least a few cursory observations. First, it looks like a slightly modified copy of a Lancair 235 or 320. There are minor differences and it does look to be using a different wing section (although I'd have to confirm that), but overall it seems similar enough to at least raise an eyebrow.[/i]
[i][i]They show quite a few pictures of the parts and the various sub assemblies so you can get at least an idea of what's involved in putting this together. It looks to be a fairly standard structure although one or two areas would need a bit of a closer examination in order to see the details.[/i]
[i]But looking through all the presentation materials all I could think of is: Sloppy. If these pictures are truly representative of their parts and their work I'd probably recommend a deeper investigation before committing. The first picture I randomly selected was that of the rudder assembly. Even a cursory glance shows that the molded part came out of the tool with surface wrinkles - almost as if the material bunched up and separated from the tool. Also, looking at the sides of the fuselage, that too looks to be uneven. The surface seems to be poorly shaped (look at the light reflections) with surface discontinuities that make it look like the surface of an orange. It is possible that this is misleading and maybe it has something to do with the tool prep or the primer coat, but quite frankly I can't think of anything that would cause this except poor tooling or maybe poor quality control during fabrication.[/i]
[i]Another area that might cause some concern is the wing spar - possibly the strength, but more so the manufacturing itself. First of all, it is a combination of graphite and glass. While feasible, generally this type of structure is not recommended unless one really understands how the materials behave together. The significant difference in stiffness between the glass and the graphite makes each component see the loads a bit differently, with more of the load going to the stiffer component of the structure. If this is not understood in the design of the part, this could lead to eventual structural problems.[/i]
[i]From the layup standpoint, if you look at the root of the spar, the graphite ends petty much at the root rib. Why? And then the way it is laid up, it is very sloppy, with untrimmed fibers running every which way. Not really a good presentation and certainly not something that most companies would want to use as a demonstration of their skills.[/i]
[i]Regarding their performance numbers, they look to be something that they took from some analysis program without really verifying what they were presenting - I'd prefer to see something that's a bit more accurate and flight proven. I too would be a bit skeptical of several of the claims, although it is a clean airplane and some of the numbers may not be too far off. The glide ratio? Yea, I'd question that too. Even without the prop it sounds way too good to be true.[/i]
[i]In short, if you're interested in this airplane I'd suggest that you hire someone in your area that really knows small airplane design and engineering issues and have him or her go through their factory with you.[/i][/i]
This kind of spooked me, (mainly because I do not understand composites); so I did a little research on some of the ponts regarding the spar and hear similar opinions. I would be interested in hearing why the wing spar is constructed in this manner? Why is carbon fiber just through the interior of the wing and not out to the end of the spar. Is there a design consideration in this? The points about the finish are not really that big a concern to me. While true that the finish is not the same as that of say a CT, Dynamic, or Pulsar, I believe this because their products are delivered in a more complete state, (those companies having the opportunity to do more finishing on their end), I don't mind a little body work now and then.
Also, from reading this list, I see that the lightning seems to be a redesign of the Esqual? Did the Esqual use the same type of wing spar composition as the Lightning. If so, this would lend some validation to the fact that there must be several of those flying and no real problems to speak of?
Please understand that I am not complaining about the build quality or design, so do not take offense. I am just searching for some answers to questions that have been raised about the design and finish before I make the decision to put down my money.
Thanks for any help that you can provide.
Georgie
Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know. Ask your question on Yahoo! Answers. [/b] | Quote: | | [b] href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com |
|
0123456789012
| | - The Matronics Lightning-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pequeajim
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 708
Location: New Holland, PA
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 6:45 pm Post subject: Another New Lightning |
|
|
Congratulations Rick!
Linda & Joe… You’re next!
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pete
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 7:49 PM
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Another New Lightning
DAR Gary Meuer hands Rick Bowen his Experimental Amateur Built airworthiness certificate Monday evening Feb 12th. Congrats to Rick. After a weekend of hard work and final touches the Lightning passed inspection with no issues.
Photo 22 shows Rick’s Lightning in the foreground, Linda & Joe Mathias’ (yellow & red), the Lightning prototype, and in the corner Duane Sorenson’s. Duane’s is ready for inspection as soon as Duane can return to Shelbyville.
Pete
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim and Mary Young
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 3:31 PM
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Qualith of build and durability?
Seems like it would be good if you (or Nick) put your rebuttal on the homebuiltairplanes.com website under the same thread as the comments were made. Letting it stand unchallenged there only seems to give it a sense of legitimacy. Perhaps some of the other happy Lightning owners could also respond there. However, I realize time is an issue so if you can't it's understandable but unfortunate.
Jim Young
| Quote: |
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Pete
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 3:53 PM
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: Qualith of build and durability?
Hi All,
The internet is a great tool but sometimes there are some posts that really make me shake my head. The quote from the moderator of the www.homebuiltairplanes.com web site is another one of those. It always amazes me when someone sets himself up as a self proclaimed “expert” and then makes statements based on assumptions about photos posted on another site.
Sloppy? He first talks about wrinkles in the rudder skin. If he even had a cursory knowledge of composites he would know that the lines he sees are not wrinkles but the relief lines in the foam core that allow resin infusion. He would also know that a light scuffing with sand paper would make them disappear. The material was not bunched up. Nor was it separated from the tool. He makes assumptions without enough knowledge to make valid assumptions.
Second, he talks about the spar. He says that the combination of glass and carbon is “not recommended”. Well, he should tell that to Cirrus, Pulsar, Boeing, and others. Maybe they will change their wing construction to comply with this “expert”. If he tells Cessna right away maybe they can change their wing before the first of the “New Generation” aircraft are sold! He states that the carbon ends at the root rib when in actuality it extends on out the spar. You just can’t see it in the photo. Again, an “expert” making assumptions about items he can’t even see in a photo.
He questions the spar strength? On what basis? Maybe his vast knowledge of composites? We tested that wing to 11 G positive. Then we tested it to 11 G negative. Then in the high speed stall configuration. Photos of the test are on the web site. 95% of all aircraft wings in use today would not hold up to our test including Cessna, Piper, Mooney, Vans RV Series, Sonex, Zenith, and most others.
Finally, he doubts our performance numbers and thinks they are from an “analysis program” and he would prefer to see “[i]something that's a bit more accurate and flight proven”. [/i][i]Again he’s assuming we are not being forthright with our performance numbers. Well, those who know us and build with us know that we have not used “analysis programs” in the development of this aircraft. We built it the way we thought it should be built based on our experience over the last nearly 20 years building dozens of homebuilt aircraft. We put our own butt on the line and went out and flew it and reported the performance we saw. We prove it again every week by flying beside Vans RV-6 & 7’s and finding that we are faster when flown in the economy cruise mode. The RV’s will go faster if the pilots push the throttle to the 13 gph fuel use rate but at their 9.5 gph rate we are faster using our 5.5 gph. We even got to report first hand our glide ratio when Nick hit a turkey buzzard on the spinner and the prop shattered 7 miles away from the airport at 2500 ft above the ground and he had enough glide to get back to the airport and fly a std pattern! Maybe we’ll call that the Turkey Buzzard analysis program reporting a real life 17:1 glide.[/i][i][/i]
[i] [/i]
[i]To sum it up, when we listen to the comments of builders who have completed composite aircraft and really know what they are talking about, we are encouraged by what they say about our kit. We will get better yet as this year goes by and you can rest assured that we won’t be reporting performance we don’t see.[/i]
[i] [/i]
[i]Part of my reason for responding here is to illustrate that you can’t always believe the info posted on the net. Too often list members make observations and offer opinions and advise that is well out of their area of expertise. Maybe they did sleep at a Holiday Inn but still…… Call me old fashioned but I think authors should remember that the freedom that allows postings on some internet list should be accompanied by the responsibility to have some idea of what they are talking about.[/i]
[i] [/i]
[i]Pete[/i]
From: owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of George SMith
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 8:47 AM
To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Qualith of build and durability?
I am interesting in possibly purchasing the Lightning and have been surfing around the forums for information on the aircraft. Since it is so new, it is difficult to find many people who have experience with it. My concern is that I am need to research this well as spending this much money on a hobby is not well spent if I am not happy with my purchase 2-3 years down the line.
In reading one particular forum, I came across a couple of guys asking questions about the Lightning and one gentleman’s thoughts on the aircraft after visiting the Arion Aircraft web site.
[i]An interesting new airplane. I haven't heard of this one but they do show quite a bit at their web site to alloow me to make at least a few cursory observations. First, it looks like a slightly modified copy of a Lancair 235 or 320. There are minor differences and it does look to be using a different wing section (although I'd have to confirm that), but overall it seems similar enough to at least raise an eyebrow.[/i]
[i][i]They show quite a few pictures of the parts and the various sub assemblies so you can get at least an idea of what's involved in putting this together. It looks to be a fairly standard structure although one or two areas would need a bit of a closer examination in order to see the details.[/i]
[i]But looking through all the presentation materials all I could think of is: Sloppy. If these pictures are truly representative of their parts and their work I'd probably recommend a deeper investigation before committing. The first picture I randomly selected was that of the rudder assembly. Even a cursory glance shows that the molded part came out of the tool with surface wrinkles - almost as if the material bunched up and separated from the tool. Also, looking at the sides of the fuselage, that too looks to be uneven. The surface seems to be poorly shaped (look at the light reflections) with surface discontinuities that make it look like the surface of an orange. It is possible that this is misleading and maybe it has something to do with the tool prep or the primer coat, but quite frankly I can't think of anything that would cause this except poor tooling or maybe poor quality control during fabrication.[/i]
[i]Another area that might cause some concern is the wing spar - possibly the strength, but more so the manufacturing itself. First of all, it is a combination of graphite and glass. While feasible, generally this type of structure is not recommended unless one really understands how the materials behave together. The significant difference in stiffness between the glass and the graphite makes each component see the loads a bit differently, with more of the load going to the stiffer component of the structure. If this is not understood in the design of the part, this could lead to eventual structural problems.[/i]
[i]From the layup standpoint, if you look at the root of the spar, the graphite ends petty much at the root rib. Why? And then the way it is laid up, it is very sloppy, with untrimmed fibers running every which way. Not really a good presentation and certainly not something that most companies would want to use as a demonstration of their skills.[/i]
[i]Regarding their performance numbers, they look to be something that they took from some analysis program without really verifying what they were presenting - I'd prefer to see something that's a bit more accurate and flight proven. I too would be a bit skeptical of several of the claims, although it is a clean airplane and some of the numbers may not be too far off. The glide ratio? Yea, I'd question that too. Even without the prop it sounds way too good to be true.[/i]
[i]In short, if you're interested in this airplane I'd suggest that you hire someone in your area that really knows small airplane design and engineering issues and have him or her go through their factory with you.[/i][/i]
This kind of spooked me, (mainly because I do not understand composites); so I did a little research on some of the ponts regarding the spar and hear similar opinions. I would be interested in hearing why the wing spar is constructed in this manner? Why is carbon fiber just through the interior of the wing and not out to the end of the spar. Is there a design consideration in this? The points about the finish are not really that big a concern to me. While true that the finish is not the same as that of say a CT, Dynamic, or Pulsar, I believe this because their products are delivered in a more complete state, (those companies having the opportunity to do more finishing on their end), I don't mind a little body work now and then.
Also, from reading this list, I see that the lightning seems to be a redesign of the Esqual? Did the Esqual use the same type of wing spar composition as the Lightning. If so, this would lend some validation to the fact that there must be several of those flying and no real problems to speak of?
Please understand that I am not complaining about the build quality or design, so do not take offense. I am just searching for some answers to questions that have been raised about the design and finish before I make the decision to put down my money.
Thanks for any help that you can provide.
Georgie
Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know. Ask your question on Yahoo! Answers. [/b] | Quote: | | [b] href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com |
|
0[/b] [/quote]12http://forums.matronics.com[/b] [/quote]3
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Lightning-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rick
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 113
Location: Colonial Beach, Virginia
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:39 am Post subject: Another New Lightning |
|
|
Got back last night from SYI...wow, talk about a marathon four days of work
to get ready for the inspection!
Wanted to just say a public "THANK YOU" to all the guys at SYI for their
help in taking my Lightning from a bunch of large and small parts, to a
"official" experimental aircraft.
Especially Mark, Mike and Nick, for all the hard work...!
Also, on another note, I have met several people who I now consider to be a
friend while doing this project, both fellow builders, and Arion employee's.
Good people end up building and working on these airplanes---very good
people.
Linda and Joe, hope the FAA gets in gear and gets your paperwork straight
soon, keep after them.....beautiful plane you have got there!
Thanks again guys,
Rick
_________________________________________________________________
Check out all that glitters with the MSN Entertainment Guide to the Academy
Awards® http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline2
| | - The Matronics Lightning-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
