Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

kitplanes

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Lightning-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

wb2ssj(at)earthlink.net
Guest

Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 5:16 pm Post subject: kitplanes

Just finished reading the Magazine with Nick  sitting in the left seat by himself, which was strange.  The article left  me puzzled and confused. I would be interested in others comments about the  content and overal l tone of the review of the Lightning.   Tex

   [quote][b]

dashvii(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:02 am Post subject: kitplanes

Tex C

    Well....I think that he mentions the early Lightnings as having neutral to slight negative stability.  I can tell you that I have never experienced this C but it would have been more what I would call a neutral to slight positive stability in pitch from the loadings that I have seen.  It was also hard to find stick center position without looking.  I do think that the changes that have been made will result in a better overall product for clients.  I really liked the feel of the original as it felt more like a fighter.  I asked a guy who has worked testing planes for a long time what he though.  Eric replied:

  

 "Wow C they couldn't have made a bigger change unless they trimmed the horizontal.



Lot's of different effects come into play here.  In an tab-trimmed aircraft C there is a completely different interaction between stick-free stability C stick-fixed stability C and stick-force-gradient than there is in a bungee system.  Because bungees and springs yield more force for more deflection C the bungee system actually has better stick-free stability at large gust upsets C but tends to have low breakout and center forces.  I can understand how this would not bother an experienced pilot who likes light stick forces.  The trim tab set up is better for the 20 to 50 hour/year pilots that make up most of the market.  



As to the CG change C I cannot tell without flying the two aircraft side-by-side.  I have seen very small CG changes make huge differences in stick force gradient in some aircraft C especially if they had a CG close the wing aero center C but well forward of the static stability point.  This happens on lots of GA aircraft where the tails have been sized generously for low time pilots.  The issue is that while the aircraft is stable at an aft CG C it doesn't "feel" very confidence inspiring.  A good test pilot will set down C look at the longitudinal stability C and then decide how deep he wants to explore this region.



So the trim tab system gave you most of the breakout force and centering improvement C while the CG change may have done the most for the full-travel-full-G-range stick force gradient.  That's how the second order stability and control equations come out.  Again C I'd have to have either the raw data or design the control test points myself to be certain and assign figures of merit.



I used to be a fan of down-springs as a way of increasing stick-force gradient for lower time pilots in high performance aircraft.  The problem is they swap a positive G longitudinal stability issue for a negative one.  We all fly negative in heavy turbulence.  Recently C I've shifted my emphasis towards servo and anti-servo tabs and their effects.  I am still a fan of bungees to coordinate roll and yaw C as on the Mooney.  The aircraft can still be slipped and skidded C it just takes more force and makes up for lazy feet in the pattern.



By far C the best combination of feel C flying qualities C stability C and control comes from a trim-able horizontal.  It is the most expensive and mechanically complex.  Second most complex is the manual trim tab system C followed by the all-electric.  Simplist is no system C bungees are common on sailplanes where people like a light feel and max speeds are low."

  

 I think that the above would be a fair assessment.  I was with Buz on not thinking the change in C.G. in this case had much to do with the stability improvement C but as you read above C even a slight difference can make a large improvement on some aircraft.  Keep in mind that there are many aircraft built with neutral to slightly positive stability.  This doesn't mean that you are going to loose control of the aircraft when we talk about stability.  What it does mean is what you read about trimability.  It also means that you have to hand fly the airplane more b/c the stick would pretty much stay at whatever pitch you put it at.  I have not personally evaluated the new demo C but believe what the author reported and remind everybody that if they have an early Lightning and would like to make these changes they can be made to an already built and flying plane.  I also want to remind everybody that it's not a recall type of item C it doesn't need to/have to change.  Some of these changes were to allow a low time pilot to be able to easily and confidently fly the airplane.  It's a qualitative change based on "feel".  Hope this helps C Brian W.

   

 From: wb2ssj(at)earthlink.net

To: Lightning-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: kitplanes 

Date: Tue C 5 Aug 2008 21:16:06 -0400

     Just finished reading the Magazine with Nick sitting in the left seat by himself C which was strange.  The article left me puzzled and confused. I would be interested in others comments about the content and overal l tone of the review of the Lightning.  Tex

 	  Quote: 	
		  



st" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List

ttp://forums.matronics.com

=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	
Got Game? Win Prizes in the Windows Live Hotmail Mobile Summer Games Trivia Contest Find out how.  [quote][b]

N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Guest

Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:03 am Post subject: kitplanes

Tex and all,

     Sorry, this will be a little long, but I  will expand a little more on what I wrote on the subject while I was at  OSH.  Brian covered a lot in his recent message.  

     Overall, I thought the article was good in that it  painted Arion as a progressive or proactive company that is willing to change  the product to make it better for the customers.  However, please note that  Nick did not change the trim system because of the draft flight review that the  author wrote after flying the first demo Lightning and Linda's aircraft.   The new trim system was already on Nick's list of changes to make, but perhaps  the timing of the trim change was accelerated because of the upcoming  article.  Once the new demo had the new trim system, the author liked the  way the new 2008 demo flew.  Of course "better" is a relative term.  I  liked the light stick forces and stick force per G that the prototype and  original demo had (and Linda's airplane).  However, on long cross country  flights it can be more work if you have to hand fly it all the time.   

     As to the neutral pitch stability issue, it was the  bungee trim system that makes the airplane fly like it has those  characteristics.  Let me explain:  First neutral pitch stability is a  great situation for a fighter or an aerobatic aircraft (most of my flying time  is in these type aircraft) because both of them are often rapidly going  from high speed to low speed and then back to high speed again, many times  during a dog fight or aerobatic sequence.  If you had to constantly re-trim  the aircraft with each speed change you would wear out the trim button.   Just kidding, but your work load would be high as you trimmed the aircraft to  keep stick forces low.  So they are designed to always keep low stick  forces, but in doing so, it becomes a bit touchy (very light pitch forces) if  you are not used to flying that type of aircraft.  If you current Lightning  or Esqual pilots with the bungee trim system want to test this  out, pay attention to which way you really have to trim your aircraft as you  change speeds.  A normal aircraft will need more nose up trim as you slow  down and more down trim as you speed up.  The bungee system actually  requires very little trim as you change speeds and, depending on how you have  them adjusted, can actually require the reverse of this.  Meaning as you  slow down you will need nose down, not nose up.  Weird but true.  Why,  because the bungee that attaches directly to the up elevator push / pull tube  becomes more effective as you slow and there is not as much airflow over the  elevator holding it in position.  Therefore, as you slow, the bungee is  able to pull more and more up elevator.  Makes the airplane act like it has  an aft CG. (Note, this is only with flaps up.  With flaps  down, you are now flying a new wing and the bungees generally will not  completely trim off all forces.)  So the negative pitch  stability that the author mentioned comes from the fact that when the aircraft  (with the bungee system) is slow and you pull back on the stick and then let go,  it will not recover to the previously trimmed flight condition, it will continue  to pitch up by itself because the bungee can pull more and more up by itself as  there is less airflow over the elevator to keep it in trim.  Try as hard as  I did to diagram the system to the author and draw pitch stability curves, he  was convinced that it was a CG problem even though the three Lightnings he flew  were all at about the same CG.  His comment was that we must have weighed  the aircraft wrong or miss-calculated the Cg.  

     When you do the pitch up maneuver (pull pack  on the stick and let go) with the new trim system the airplane will return to  the previously trimmed flight condition (airspeed) thus showing good pitch  stability.  So, the one thing that I do not agree with is the author's  thought that the "better flying qualities" of the new demo has to do with  moving the CG more forward.  To reiterate, the change to the new electric  trim system is what made the change, because the three airplanes he flew had the  same CG (within a hair of the same - certainly not enough to make a major change  like he reported) when he flew them.  

     I kind of hate to disagree with him because after  many emails, many phone calls, and flying with him in Linda's airplane, he has  become a friend (even though he is an ex Navy "heavy" driver).  He does  however, have some knowledge in his Navy "Noggin".  Heck, world record  holder Earl (also ex Navy) knows him, so that in itself is a positive  thing.   Overall a great guy to talk to and share war stories and  hangar talk with.  So my bottom line is that it is a good article, but I do  hope readers will read the entire article and not just the first part.  As  to Nick flying in the right seat, all good fighter pilots want the stick in the  right hand and the throttle in the left hand.  

 Blue Skies,

 Buz



Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.

  [quote][b]

dashvii(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 2:28 pm Post subject: kitplanes

The one thing C from my experience that I would like to disagree with C after flying several different Lightnings was the "negative static stability" remark.  I have not flown at all C.G. combinations C but I have flown at a similar weight and C.G. range based on fuel and pilot and passenger weights.  In my experience the aircraft never showed even a slight negative static stability characteristic as this would be indicated if you were to pitch up and let go of the stick that the aircraft would continue to pitch up.  I never saw this.  It would either slowly come back to level through a series of oscillations or stay wherever you let go of it.  I kind of liked this.  I haven't flown a lot of fighters like Buz C but I have flown some aerobatic planes.  It's interesting when you can just put the nose where you want it C basically fly hands off and speed up or slow down while doing so.  If it were negatively static stable you would never be able to fly the plane hands off as it would constantly be wanting to change pitch regardless of airspeed or trim.  

  

 Now what may appeal to some builders about the bungee system is that it is probably a better setup to dampen out turbulence.  You folks out west may want to think about keeping that.  You east coast and sunday flyers or low time pilots will probably love the standard trim tab.  Still C he did come up with the same conclusion as I did:  Love to fly the Lightning and the company is doing a good job making their product better for the customers.  My .02  Brian W.

   

 From: N1BZRich(at)aol.com

Date: Wed C 6 Aug 2008 12:02:55 -0400

Subject: Re: kitplanes 

To: lightning-list(at)matronics.com

  Tex and all C

     Sorry C this will be a little long C but I will expand a little more on what I wrote on the subject while I was at OSH.  Brian covered a lot in his recent message.  

     Overall C I thought the article was good in that it painted Arion as a progressive or proactive company that is willing to change the product to make it better for the customers.  However C please note that Nick did not change the trim system because of the draft flight review that the author wrote after flying the first demo Lightning and Linda's aircraft.  The new trim system was already on Nick's list of changes to make C but perhaps the timing of the trim change was accelerated because of the upcoming article.  Once the new demo had the new trim system C the author liked the way the new 2008 demo flew.  Of course "better" is a relative term.  I liked the light stick forces and stick force per G that the prototype and original demo had (and Linda's airplane).  However C on long cross country flights it can be more work if you have to hand fly it all the time.  

     As to the neutral pitch stability issue C it was the bungee trim system that makes the airplane fly like it has those characteristics.  Let me explain:  First neutral pitch stability is a great situation for a fighter or an aerobatic aircraft (most of my flying time is in these type aircraft) because both of them are often rapidly going from high speed to low speed and then back to high speed again C many times during a dog fight or aerobatic sequence.  If you had to constantly re-trim the aircraft with each speed change you would wear out the trim button.  Just kidding C but your work load would be high as you trimmed the aircraft to keep stick forces low.  So they are designed to always keep low stick forces C but in doing so C it becomes a bit touchy (very light pitch forces) if you are not used to flying that type of aircraft.  If you current Lightning or Esqual pilots with the bungee trim system want to test this out C pay attention to which way you really have to trim your aircraft as you change speeds.  A normal aircraft will need more nose up trim as you slow down and more down trim as you speed up.  The bungee system actually requires very little trim as you change speeds and C depending on how you have them adjusted C can actually require the reverse of this.  Meaning as you slow down you will need nose down C not nose up.  Weird but true.  Why C because the bungee that attaches directly to the up elevator push / pull tube becomes more effective as you slow and there is not as much airflow over the elevator holding it in position.  Therefore C as you slow C the bungee is able to pull more and more up elevator.  Makes the airplane act like it has an aft CG. (Note C this is only with flaps up.  With flaps down C you are now flying a new wing and the bungees generally will not completely trim off all forces.)  So the negative pitch stability that the author mentioned comes from the fact that when the aircraft (with the bungee system) is slow and you pull back on the stick and then let go C it will not recover to the previously trimmed flight condition C it will continue to pitch up by itself because the bungee can pull more and more up by itself as there is less airflow over the elevator to keep it in trim.  Try as hard as I did to diagram the system to the author and draw pitch stability curves C he was convinced that it was a CG problem even though the three Lightnings he flew were all at about the same CG.  His comment was that we must have weighed the aircraft wrong or miss-calculated the Cg.  

     When you do the pitch up maneuver (pull pack on the stick and let go) with the new trim system the airplane will return to the previously trimmed flight condition (airspeed) thus showing good pitch stability.  So C the one thing that I do not agree with is the author's thought that the "better flying qualities" of the new demo has to do with moving the CG more forward.  To reiterate C the change to the new electric trim system is what made the change C because the three airplanes he flew had the same CG (within a hair of the same - certainly not enough to make a major change like he reported) when he flew them.  

     I kind of hate to disagree with him because after many emails C many phone calls C and flying with him in Linda's airplane C he has become a friend (even though he is an ex Navy "heavy" driver).  He does however C have some knowledge in his Navy "Noggin".  Heck C world record holder Earl (also ex Navy) knows him C so that in itself is a positive thing.   Overall a great guy to talk to and share war stories and hangar talk with.  So my bottom line is that it is a good article C but I do hope readers will read the entire article and not just the first part.  As to Nick flying in the right seat C all good fighter pilots want the stick in the right hand and the throttle in the left hand.  

 Blue Skies C

 Buz



   Looking for a car that's sporty C fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.

 	  Quote: 	
		  



st" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List

ttp://forums.matronics.com

=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution



	
Reveal your inner athlete and share it with friends on Windows Live. Share now!  [quote][b]

N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:16 pm Post subject: kitplanes

In a message dated 8/6/2008 6:29:20 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  dashvii(at)hotmail.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  In my    experience the aircraft never showed even a slight negative static stability    characteristic as this would be indicated if you were to pitch up and let go    of the stick that the aircraft would continue to pitch up.  I never saw    this. 	


 

 Actually I have seen this at slow airspeeds in all the  Lightnings and Esquals (about 7 differnet aircraft) that I have flown with  the exception of the new demo with the trim tab system.

  

 As to dampening out turbulence, I doubt that there will be $0.02 difference  between bungees and the new trim system.  And the other pluses of the  new system way outweigh that if there is a difference.  My suggestion to  all currently flying Lightnings and those being built is to go with the new  system.  You will be much happier in the long run and your maintenance  headaches with the bungees (keeping them properly adjusted and replaced on a  regular basis) will be gone.  I know if I ever get to build a Lightning, it  will have the new trim system.  And with the "break even" price that they  are available at, it is a great deal.  If any of you have any doubts, come  on out to the September 2nd annual Lightning Fly in and fly the new demo.   Heck, all of you should be there whether or not you have any doubts.

 Buzz  (ops, typo, but when I spell it with two Zs, the second Z is  silent)

  



Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.

Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Guest

Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 2:20 pm Post subject: kitplanes

In a message dated 8/5/2008 9:17:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  wb2ssj(at)earthlink.net writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		     Just finished reading the Magazine with Nick    sitting in the left seat by himself, which was strange.  The article left    me puzzled and confused. I would be interested in others comments about the    content and overal l tone of the review of the Lightning.     Tex

 	  Quote: 	
		  



	
	


 

  

  

 Buz has offered his more detailed  discussion of the content of the  Kitplanes article, I want to offer a couple other ones.

  

 1) The editors comments and the article tried to complement Nick, et  al,  on their willingness to make changes to the design-----without  explaining that the magazine was in effect holding a loaded gun to Nick's  head.  Had the cooperation not been there the negative and error-filled  story would likely have run.. or no story at all.  While it may not  have bothered Nick that much, I consider it a breach of journalism  practice.

 In my day, the Media was never the story, it was only to report  it.   And most of all, the media should never CAUSE the story.

  

 2) It would appear that the writer of the story was not really qualified to  write it.  Oh, he holds degrees and has lots of experience as a Navy pilot,  etc.  He just has very little experience with planes like the  Lightning.  I have not flown for the Navy, the Army or even the Air  Force.  I only hold Commercial, Instrument, Single and Multi  tickets in some 30 or so birds over some  40 years.  I do  not consider myself a test pilot.   But the Lightning Ryan and I first  built  flew just fine.   I agree there was some annoying features  to the trim system.   But who the hell cares?   It  flys fast well, it lands very slow, it climbs like a homesick angel, it is  smooth and handles like an imported sports car.  That is the story,  not some crap about the CG and the trim system.   In short, the writer  missed the boat.  By a lot.  Did it improve the Lightning by moving  the CG forward a bit and having a trim tab like other planes?  Of  course.  But that should not have been the real focus.   

  

 3)  What should scare the hell out of KitPlanes is the reaction of  others who would bring a new plane to market.   About 3 years ago I  worked with Kitplanes to have the SkyRanger flown at Sun n Fun.   That  writer was a seasoned professional and did a great job.  He accurately  picked out the good and not so good features of a SkyRanger.  I answered  his questions and he was reassuring.   It was still nerve-wracking to  deal with media, but I was pleased with the outcome. He wrote a good,  honest report.  At the time we were advertising significantly in the  magazine.

  

 But NOW if I were a manufacturer I would not be very excited to hear  Kitplanes wanted to do a story about my new bird.   This guy and the  editor missed the news point of the Lightning.   What if they cant  understand the real features of my  new design?    Why  would I want to advertise with them?   Am I to be the next designer to  be badgered by them?

  

 I want to reread the article and plan to write a letter to the editor that  will better make the above points.

  

 Tex, I think your being puzzled and confused is a reasonable  response.

  

  

 Doug Koenigsberg



Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.

N1BZRich(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:44 pm Post subject: kitplanes

Excellent words, Doug, some points I had not even considered.  Well  thought out and succinctly put, as always.

 Blue skies,

 Buz



Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.

  [quote][b]

Clive J

Joined: 03 Nov 2007
Posts: 340
Location: UK

Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 7:36 pm Post subject: kitplanes

I'm also with Doug RE the article, I managed to get a copy of the

article (thanks again) and was surprised at the fixation, the ramblings

of the content. As Doug says something like this can kill an aircraft's

reputation with a periodical like kit planes and its circulation. The

instability was undoubtedly caused by the bungee system which was

quickly pointed out to me (thanks again) and without bungee up trim

she's stable. With the new trim sorted. Doesn't take much to say that

but the guy has managed to run on about it for some 10 pages and flavour

what could have been a great article.



One question, was Nick and everyone at Arion aware of the trim bungees

effect on the stability at the first flight test? 

Before the reunion 'of sorts'. 

With my communication with the LAA's engineer explaining the delay in my

taking the Esqual to him he confirmed bungee up trim has been the cause

of stability issues in a number of types. The latest, the TL Sting,

which you might have seen in the LS category.



The guy who flew my Esqual for it's initial flights gets kitplanes and

understands more about planes and controls than I'll ever know. He

writes tests for a number of periodicals in the UK. I'll ask him for an

opinion about the article. 



One thing, it was nice to see the Lightning's heritage recognised with

the Esqual comment.



The rest of the comments seem good if a little opinionated (but that

what we want isn't it?, the magazines opinion) and the self deprecating

style has a certain charm.



Regards, Clive

UK Esqual



--

Clive J

Joined: 03 Nov 2007
Posts: 340
Location: UK

Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 2:55 am Post subject: kitplanes

See below, feedback from Stan Hodgkins. As I said Stan tests and writes

for a number of periodicals and was good enough to do the initial

flights on my Esqual. Stan also flew the original Lightning, the RAF

English Electric one.....Hunters, Buccaneers. He also flew for Martin

Baker firing dummies out the back of a Meteor. He will fly the RV10 for

the LAA approval shortly. So, I figure he know's what he is talking

about!



Regards, Clive

--

Kayberg(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 4:23 am Post subject: kitplanes

In a message dated 8/9/2008 6:55:52 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  clive.james(at)uk.bp.com writes:

 [quote]-->    Lightning-List message posted by: "James, Clive R"    <clive.james(at)uk.bp.com>



See below, feedback from Stan Hodgkins.    As I said Stan tests and writes

for a number of periodicals and was good    enough to do the initial

flights on my Esqual. Stan also flew the original    Lightning, the RAF

English Electric one.....Hunters, Buccaneers. He also    flew for Martin

Baker firing dummies out the back of a Meteor. He will fly    the RV10 for

the LAA approval shortly. So, I figure he know's what he is    talking

about!



Regards, Clive

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

From: Stan Hodgkins [mailto:stan.hodgkins39(at)tiscali.co.uk]    

Sent: 08 August 2008 11:58

To: James, Clive R

Subject: RE:    kitplanes 



Hi Clive



Yes, I did read the article    in Kit Planes and I thought it was quite

fairly done.  The point he    made about Nick listening and being open to

improvements was absolutely    valid.  Chuck Berthe is an extremely

experienced test pilot and is    revered in the industry.  Vans Aircraft in

particular have a very high    regard for him.  As far as the longitudinal

trim/control is concerned    Chuck found much the same as we did, I

thought.  



When test    pilots try out a new machine, the owner/designer is obviously

keen to have    a good report, but a conscientious test pilot is just going

to write the    truth on what he finds.  This is not the media pointing a

gun at the    designer's head, just the tp pointing out any faults he finds

- that is the    whole point of test flying.  I have had this recently with

the    *********** - I just told it as I found it.  We are doing nobody    any

favours by ignoring shortcomings, especially in regard

to handling    qualities.  In the past some pilots have heaped unearned

praise on    aircraft, customers have bought them and been disappointed.

Many kit    aircraft have, in the past, been sold before they were ready

for    marketing.  The early Kitfoxes were an example and there were    many

landing accidents before they fixed it with the Mark 4.



As Bob    Hoover said once - 'never fly the A model of anything!'



All the    best



Stan



--

dashvii(at)hotmail.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 4:40 am Post subject: kitplanes

 	  Quote: 	
		  "Since the early production the fuselage alone has lost nearly 30 lbs!"And correct me if I'm wrong C but since the prototype in its original configuration has lost much more than that! Brian W. 	
Your PC C mobile phone C and online services work together like never before. <>See how Windows® fits your life  [quote][b]

Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Guest

Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 5:10 am Post subject: kitplanes

In a message dated 8/9/2008 8:40:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  dashvii(at)hotmail.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		   	  Quote: 	
		  "Since the early production the fuselage alone has lost nearly 30 lbs!"And correct me if I'm wrong, but since the prototype in its original configuration has lost much more than that! Brian W. 	
	


 

  

 I think you are correct.

  

 I dont remember the weight our first one, so I was trying to be a bit  conservative.

  

  

 Doug



Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.

  [quote][b]

Clive J

Joined: 03 Nov 2007
Posts: 340
Location: UK

Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 7:18 am Post subject: kitplanes

I think we're in the same place. 

My question to Stan was what did he think about the article, the way it

was written and the content. I asked him as someone who does what Chuck

does and who has reasonable pedigree. He hasn't of course flown the

Lightning but was recently evaluating the stability of my Esqual so he

could comment to the LAA about it so has been digging around that area

of the flight characteristics of a similar aircraft (low wing sporty

single).



I thought an awful lot of column inches were spent explaining something

that was irrelevant, history, which is what I thought you were saying.

It was colour to support the conclusion of the later test but given it

was an opportunity to hear an independent view about the plane I, and I

suspect many other readers would have like to hear some more about the

Lightning itself. I hear a lot from you guys about the Lightning but you

have all had the lobotomy, I hope one day to buy my 'last plane' and

although I am getting to like the Esqual I don't think it is that

animal. Chuck's article could have given me more information though as

I've been reading up on stability ever since it was suggested the Esqual

didn't have any I was somewhat interested but not 5 pages interested.



The comment about the Kitfox was made because it got great write ups

here in the UK and lot were sold on the basis of those write ups. The

plane subsequently was involved in many ground incidents as the buyers

had a different plane than they expected. Stan is committed to telling

the truth, warts an all, in his reports as he's explained it doesn't do

anyone any favours (except maybe the manufacturers).



One thing I don't think we'll agree on is which Lightning is best

(whatever 'best' is), The Arion Lightning maybe a fine aircraft and no

doubt will continue to get better but the original Lightning is a

LEGEND. I hope to visit Thunder City one day and get the ride of my

life! http://www.lightning.org.uk/archive/0503.php



CJ



--

N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Guest

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 7:43 am Post subject: kitplanes

In a message dated 8/9/2008 11:19:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  clive.james(at)uk.bp.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  One    thing I don't think we'll agree on is which Lightning is best

(whatever    'best' is), The Arion Lightning maybe a fine aircraft and no

doubt will    continue to get better but the original Lightning is  a

LEGEND. 	


 

 Hey Clive,

     When you mentioned the original Lightning, did you  forget the P-38?  And of course now we have the latest Lightning, the F-35,  Lightning II.  All are great airplanes, both past and present.  Alas,  I wish I had been able to fly all of them, not just the Arion model.

 Blue Skies,

 Buz



Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos.

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Lightning-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

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