Lancair Legacy Design Flaw?

http://www.youngeagles.org/photos/gallery/Monoplanes/LancairLegacy2000.jpg

Look at the picture. It's easy to see why the Lancair is dangerous. The
horizontal stabilizers appear to be on the too small side. This would result
in their stalling before the wing. Then the aircraft would pitch up making
the main wing stall. Ill-conceived, IMO.

A good lawyer needs to get on this with respect to BadWaterBill's untimely
demise.

--
Gregory Hall

"Gregory Hall" wrote in message
...
http://www.youngeagles.org/photos/gallery/Monoplanes/LancairLegacy2000.jpg

A good lawyer needs to get on this with respect to BadWaterBill's untimely
demise.

With all due respect, that is a terrible idea. I think we already have too
many lawyers involved in GA's affairs. The Lancair is a homebuilt, experimental
aircraft; "You pays your money and you takes your chances" AKA, caveat emptor .

Vaughn

"Gregory Hall" wrote in message
...
http://www.youngeagles.org/photos/gallery/Monoplanes/LancairLegacy2000.jpg

Look at the picture. It's easy to see why the Lancair is dangerous. The
horizontal stabilizers appear to be on the too small side. This would
result in their stalling before the wing. Then the aircraft would pitch up
making the main wing stall. Ill-conceived, IMO.

A good lawyer needs to get on this with respect to BadWaterBill's untimely
demise.

--
Gregory Hall

Are you proposing a Lawyer for horizontal stabilizer design review? My
guess is that if you have been able to do a review of the horizontal stab
from a photo, that BwB would have a good idea of just what he was flying and
as the PIC was responsible for the safe operation of the bird. What a
Lawyer could add to this tragedy without creating a second tragedy is not
clear.

Gregory Hall wrote:
http://www.youngeagles.org/photos/gallery/Monoplanes/LancairLegacy2000.jpg

Look at the picture. It's easy to see why the Lancair is dangerous. The
horizontal stabilizers appear to be on the too small side. This would result
in their stalling before the wing. Then the aircraft would pitch up making
the main wing stall. Ill-conceived, IMO.

A good lawyer needs to get on this with respect to BadWaterBill's untimely
demise.

--
Gregory Hall



Bill would cuss you out for saying that.

And?

What is the area ratio of stab/wing?

Did you notice that the wing is tiny too?



--

Richard

(remove the X to email)

"cavelamb himself" wrote in message
m...
Gregory Hall wrote:
http://www.youngeagles.org/photos/gallery/Monoplanes/LancairLegacy2000.jpg

Look at the picture. It's easy to see why the Lancair is dangerous. The
horizontal stabilizers appear to be on the too small side. This would
result in their stalling before the wing. Then the aircraft would pitch
up making the main wing stall. Ill-conceived, IMO.

A good lawyer needs to get on this with respect to BadWaterBill's
untimely demise.

--
Gregory Hall

Bill would cuss you out for saying that.

And?

What is the area ratio of stab/wing?

Did you notice that the wing is tiny too?



--

Richard

(remove the X to email)

He seems to have missed a great deal, in just a few words.

Peter

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:41:35 -0400, Gregory Hall wrote:

http://www.youngeagles.org/photos/gallery/Monoplanes/LancairLegacy2000.jpg

Look at the picture. It's easy to see why the Lancair is dangerous. The
horizontal stabilizers appear to be on the too small side. This would result
in their stalling before the wing. Then the aircraft would pitch up making
the main wing stall. Ill-conceived, IMO.

Greg, no design theorist here but just because the hor stab "appears to
small" isn't much of an argument. The front wing of a canard compared to
the main wings is very small but the combo works in a pusher config. it
wouldn't appear to but it does.

Not knowing the camber and other details including the airflow to the
stabs makes the stalling prior argument unsubstantiated invho.

Look at the picture. It's easy to see why the Lancair is dangerous. The
horizontal stabilizers appear to be on the too small side. This would result
in their stalling before the wing. Then the aircraft would pitch up making
the main wing stall. Ill-conceived, IMO.

************************************************** *************

Any one ever look at the little tail on the ME-109?

A bitch to land but was told that was caused by the main gear
configuration.

Big John

"Gregory Hall" wrote in message
...
http://www.youngeagles.org/photos/gallery/Monoplanes/LancairLegacy2000.jpg

Look at the picture. It's easy to see why the Lancair is dangerous. The
horizontal stabilizers appear to be on the too small side. This would
result in their stalling before the wing. Then the aircraft would pitch up
making the main wing stall. Ill-conceived, IMO.

I find your strange posting to be quite offensive in its serious charges
which are totally unfounded. As others have already pointed out, you are
fundamentally incorrect about the purpose of the horizontal stabilizer. The
horizontal tail holds the nose up, not down. Your assertion about the
Legacy's stall recovery just makes no sense at all.

By the way, the Lancair Legacy is the most fun civilian airplane I've flown
and is the main reason I returned to general aviation after a decades-long
absence. I'm sure there is a Legacy near you and I'll bet its pilot would
be happy to take you for a ride. You can see for yourself what a great
airplane it is.

Dennis

"Dennis Johnson" wrote in message
. ..

"Gregory Hall" wrote in message
...
http://www.youngeagles.org/photos/gallery/Monoplanes/LancairLegacy2000.jpg

Look at the picture. It's easy to see why the Lancair is dangerous. The
horizontal stabilizers appear to be on the too small side. This would
result in their stalling before the wing. Then the aircraft would pitch
up making the main wing stall. Ill-conceived, IMO.

I find your strange posting to be quite offensive in its serious charges
which are totally unfounded. As others have already pointed out, you are
fundamentally incorrect about the purpose of the horizontal stabilizer.
The horizontal tail holds the nose up, not down. Your assertion about the
Legacy's stall recovery just makes no sense at all.


I think it makes good sense. Look at the size of that engine up front. Looks
like a P-51 Mustang for pity sake. When you're being pulled along by that
big prop and heavy, powerful engine it pulls the nose of the aircraft down.
The horizontal stabilizers have to counteract this force by putting an
upward force on the nose by pushing the tail down. If and when the engine
suddenly dies the aircraft will pitch up suddenly and since the size of the
stabilizers are so puny they might easily stall and be unable to counteract
the upward pitch at the nose resulting in a tail down death spiral.

By the way, the Lancair Legacy is the most fun civilian airplane I've
flown and is the main reason I returned to general aviation after a
decades-long absence. I'm sure there is a Legacy near you and I'll bet
its pilot would be happy to take you for a ride. You can see for yourself
what a great airplane it is.

It looks too much like an irresponsible, hot rod, stunt plane to me. Is it
any wonder so many companies offering homebuilt aircraft have gone out of
business?

http://www.homebuilt.org/aircraft/nolonger.html

This is the safest homebuilt IMO.(VariEze ). The canard makes it foolproof.

http://video.google.com.au/videoplay...77166441&hl=en

--
Gregory Hall

"Gregory Hall" wrote in message
...


It looks too much like an irresponsible, hot rod, stunt plane to me.

Well, you sucked me in at first, so on a troll scale of zero-to-10 you rate
at least a five. How are things in France?

Vaughn