Matronics Email Lists Forum Index Matronics Email Lists
BBS Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
 
 Get Email Distribution Too!Get Email Distribution Too!    FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

RV-9A v. Lightening
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Lightning-List
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
deuskid



Joined: 18 Feb 2006
Posts: 26
Location: St Louis, MO

PostPosted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 5:00 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

I'm in the 'consider' stage of building. I may be needing x-c several times a month [~500 nm one way] and I like composites [I considered a canard originally] but it is difficult to ignore Vans.

I sent the spreadsheet attached to the lightning website contact email on 8-7 with RV-9A info asking them to populate it with their info for comparison purposes but haven't heard from them.

I have some questions re: the Lightening

can it be equiped IFR w/ auto pilot?
what are the cockpit dimesions?
how many are flying and how many being built?
the website shows both the sport and the full Lightening to use the same engine so can a 'regular' be converted to sport at a later date without much modification/cost if necessary?

Thanks in advance.

John


- 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
View user's profile Send private message
pete(at)flylightning.net
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 6:32 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

Hello John,

The Lightning can be equipped with IFR instruments and an autopilot.
Cockpit is 44 inches wide.
There are 4 flying and 26 sold to date.
It is not within the rules to "convert" a non LSA compliant plane to a LSA
compliant one as the rule states the aircraft must have been "originally
certificated and continuously operated" within the parameters of light sport
to be flown by a pilot with light sport privileges.

Let me know if you have more questions.

Pete Krotje
Arion Aircraft, LLC

--


- 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
wolfern(at)andrews.edu
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:14 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

I have also been looking at the lightning and wondering what type of
baggage compartment space there is? From the pictures on the
lightning website it does not look like much.
thanks
Nick

On Aug 16, 2006, at 10:32 AM, Pete wrote:

[quote]

Hello John,

The Lightning can be equipped with IFR instruments and an autopilot.
Cockpit is 44 inches wide.
There are 4 flying and 26 sold to date.
It is not within the rules to "convert" a non LSA compliant plane
to a LSA
compliant one as the rule states the aircraft must have been
"originally
certificated and continuously operated" within the parameters of
light sport
to be flown by a pilot with light sport privileges.

Let me know if you have more questions.

Pete Krotje
Arion Aircraft, LLC

--


- 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
N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 7:44 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

John,
Pete has answered your basic questions, but let me add a few personal thoughts that might help you decide between the RV-9 and the Lightning. But before I do, please understand that I have only flown the Lightning prototype - not an RV-9. I have flown an RV-3, but no other RV models. I do have lots of flying time in close to 100 different airplanes including lots of experimental / sport aviation types. I have built two airplanes of my own and am helping building an EAA chapter airplane at present. I have restored several Vintage aircraft (two were Oshkosh and Sun-N- Fun champions), and am a long time EAA flight advisor and technical counselor. Lastly, I am in no way connected to the Lightning folks, other than being a happy customer for one of their other aircraft kits (Esqual) and a Jabiru engine. So here are some thoughts:
-First off, I would think that the stated cruise speed of 175 for the Lightning is probably closer to a 65% power setting. The problem is that Jabiru has not provided a percent HP chart for the 3300 engine. Ben (Pete's son) is working on that with the Jabiru factory guys, but obviously it is not one of their highest priorities.
-The stall speed for the Lightning will depend of which version you build. The "regular / fast" version has a gross weight of 1425 pounds and the stall at gross is 54 to 56 clean or 44 to 46 with flaps. The Light Sport version has a 1320 gross and the stall will be 47 to 49 clean or
38 to 40 with flaps.
-Looking at the RV-9 chart you sent, I would think the Lightning performance would fall between the 135 HP and the 160 HP "Nine". The exception would be in fuel burn. The 3300 Jab is a great little economical engine and will certainly burn less fuel.
-I think your final decision should certainly include the amount of time, effort, and dollars you want to put into getting your airplane up and flying. The Lightning kit and Jabiru should get you in the air much quicker (as little as 5 to 6 weeks if you use their builders assist program and their painter). Final cost will depend on how you equip the panel, but a new Jabiru 3300 engine is probably less dollars than a rebuilt Lycoming.
-One final thought: Which one looks best to your eye?
Good Luck on your decision. Let us know how it goes.
Blue Skies,
Buz Rich
[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
jackb911



Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:06 am    Post subject: Re: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

John,

I'm sure that the decision is not easy. I managed to get some time in both an RV6 and an Esqual. (The Esqual is very similar to the Lightning and was sold by the Lightning folks, but it looks like they no longer support it. However, the Esqual continues to be sold and supported in Europe. The European people are advertising for a new US dealer).

On a cross country platform it is my opinion that the Lightning will not be as stable or as fast as the RV. But then it won't burn as much fuel either. Your mpg in the Lightning should be better. Balanced control surfaces on the RV were great, the Esqual and I suspect the Lightning not as good. Either plane might be able to be tweaked. You might tweak the Lightning to higher speeds than normal, but the RV9 can likewise be tweaked higher. Stability for cross country was better in the RV than the Esqual; I suspect primarily due to a combination of wing loading and overall increased weight and well harmonized control input. In IFR, I would rather be in the Vans.

Mile for mile, the Lightning should fly at a lower fuel cost. Engine maintenance - I haven't talked with enough Jabiru people to feel like I have a good comparison. It is easy to take the Lycoming O-360 to several places near home no matter where you live for needed attention. The Jabiru doesn't have the same options. It continues to suffer from heating issues but seems to be a great little engine and is very smooth. An alternative to the Jabiru might be the Rotax 912 or 914. Almost all of the Esquals flying in Europe use the Rotax with favorable results. But again, even with the Rotax there are not as many service options.

The Vans has thousands of RV's flying and years of experience. The Lightning is new with good potential, but little track record (The Esqual has several years of favorable track record in Europe and a few in the US).

I would guess that you should be able to get the Lightning in the air faster with less build time. If you would rather be flying than building then the Lightning seems to have the advantage. On structural strength my nod goes to the RV especially if aerobatics are considered. The RV has maybe a 1/4 to 1/3 more baggage area available.

The Esqual is a less complex aircraft for flying, better suited for low time pilots. The low handling speeds were great! I'm not sure if the Lightning can get as close to the lower handling speeds, but if so that would be a nice positive.

The looks of the Lightning are impressive! With the right paint job I think that it (and the Esqual) are my favorites on curb appeal.

Bottom line? The decision will come down to pilot preference. Both planes appear to be good planes. One has a long track record, the other is just starting to build one. Before you decide, you should definitely spend some time flying in both, research the power plant pros and cons, and consider what support you might need for your plane down the road and will it be there. Don't get so caught up in your dreams that you overlook the realities of how each plane flies today. After you have listened to me and everyone else, it is your money, time, and life that are on the line.

Just another opinion out of many.

Good luck!


- 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
View user's profile Send private message
dashvii(at)hotmail.com
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:32 pm    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

IMile for mile, the Lightning should fly at a lower fuel cost. Engine
maintenance - I haven't talked with enough Jabiru people to feel like I have
a good comparison. It is easy to take the Lycoming O-360 to several places
near home no matter where you live for needed attention. The Jabiru doesn't
have the same options. It continues to suffer from heating issues but seems
to be a great little engine and is very smooth. An alternative to the Jabiru
might be the Rotax 912 or 914. Almost all of the Esquals flying in Europe
use the Rotax with favorable results. But again, even with the Rotax there
are not as many service options.

The Vans has thousands of RV's flying and years of experience. The Lightning
is new with good potential, but little track record (The Esqual has several
years of favorable track record in Europe and a few in the US).

I would guess that you should be able to get the Lightning in the air faster
with less build time. If you would rather be flying than building then the
Lightning seems to have the advantage. On structural strength my nod goes to
the RV especially if aerobatics are considered. The RV has maybe a 1/4 to
1/3 more baggage area available.

The Esqual is a less complex aircraft for flying, better suited for low time
pilots. The low handling speeds were great! I'm not sure if the Lightning
can get as close to the lower handling speeds, but if so that would be a
nice positive.

John,
I have not flown an RV-6, although I plan to get some time in one before
too long. I have flown both the Lightning and Esqual though. It is my
underdstanding that the Esqual company has sold out and possibly reforming
another company to market the Esqual. Right now in Shelbyville there are
two Esquals which are being built. These will be the last two built here
unless they start making new kits again. Although I have not flown the RV6,
Nick that test flew the first Lightning has flown both. So I do have some
basis for comparison here. Nick relayed that the RV-6 was less stable in
roll than the Lightning. The pitch is fairly comparable. Fuel burn at 75%
cruise is about 5.5 gph on the Lightning. This is a 120hp engine that will
give you a cruise of 185mph which is almost identical to a 150hp RV. So I
would have to say that the Lightning would be better for cross-country
flying. The only way that I would deviate from that is if you needed a lot
of cargo room. You're probably not going to get a couple of suit cases in
there, but then again you won't get a whole lot in the RV either. If we
ever made the Lightning with the 180hp 8 cylinder Jabiru it would be faster
than any of the RV series of aircraft.

On a 1500 mile + trip from TN to Arizona the ride was smoother than an
Esqual and the only turbulence was where you'd expect it and it wasn't more
than minor chop. The Lightning does have slightly reclined seating and I
think that for long trips, fashioning some sort of headrest would be more
comfortable as I kept wanting to bend my neck forward so that my head was up
straight. We covered the last 500 miles in 2 hours 45 minutes which
averages out to about 181mph. The control feel for the Lightning is totally
different than the Esqual is. The controls are counterweighted and the
inputs have more of a solid and fluid feel to them. In IFR conditions the
Lightning does not have static wicks and therefore could be a no-go if
flying around thunderstorms.

Jack was right that finding a person to work on the Jabiru engine might be a
little harder to find. There is an engine seminar program here in
Shelbyville that can be taken. Then there are kits that can be sent out for
overhaul or you can bring it in for overhaul. The Jabiru requires little
maintenance other than the normal oil change. It is much cheaper to
overhaul than either a Lycoming or Continental.

We have had several people "convert" to at least looking at the Lightning
over the RV series simply due to the short build times. I would look
carefully at the structural strength. The Lightning is not considered an
aerobatic aircraft, so if that is a consideration then you might want to
look at the RV. On the other hand the Lightning wing had an Ultimate Load
Factor that will surpass over 95% of aircraft that are built today. The
Lightning comes in just slightly faster than a standard Esqual, but less
than 10mph faster if I remember correctly. I come in at 70mph in the
Lightning and rotate around 60. So that is a pretty slow speed. The
Lightning, however does fly much differently than the Esqual. You aim for a
landing point and if you are on speed then you land where you want. The
Esqual would float forever. The Lightning does not. I would rate the
Lightning as harder to fly than the Esqual, but not difficult. It isn't any
harder to fly than an RV6. I would not put a low time pilot in one without
getting some transition training.

One last thought. The RV is metal, and the Lightning is composite. You
don't get the curves with the metal. It is a different kind of construction
as well. If you want to fly fast in a short amount of time and have great
looks and superb handling I'd go with the lightning. If you want a little
longer to get in the air and fly a few knots faster with up to twice the
fuel burn and still good handling, I'd go with the RV.
Just my observations, Brian W.


- 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
Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 5:20 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

In a message dated 8/18/2006 12:33:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, dashvii(at)hotmail.com writes:
Quote:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Brian Whittingham" <dashvii(at)hotmail.com>

IMile for mile, the Lightning should fly at a lower fuel cost. Engine
maintenance - I haven't talked with enough Jabiru people to feel like I have
a good comparison. It is easy to take the Lycoming O-360 to several places
near home no matter where you live for needed attention. The Jabiru doesn't
have the same options. It continues to suffer from heating issues but seems
to be a great little engine and is very smooth. An alternative to the Jabiru
might be the Rotax 912 or 914. Almost all of the Esquals flying in Europe
use the Rotax with favorable results. But again, even with the Rotax there
are not as many service options.



Just noting that the 3300 Jabiru horsepower exceeds both the 912 and troublesom 914...for less money than either. Also much easier to install a Jab engine that a 912. Every 912 install looks like a plumbers nightmare. Also note that a 912 should be considered a "throw away" engine. Overhauls equal the price of a new engine.

Maintenance of 1930's engine such as the Continental or Lycoming is not cheap. Changing spark plugs for $1.77 each on a Jab is very different that $15 or 20 each for the others. And there is the matter of engine weight. It is like having an extra passenger along on each flight.

I would also note that constructing an RV takes at least 10 times as long as a Lightning. Just visit some local guy trying to build one as he is constructing the fuselage. I suspect half of the airframe weight is from rivets.

Doug Koenigsberg
[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
pete(at)flylightning.net
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 6:10 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

All,

Here's a email that has me just chomping at the bit to correct some real
inaccuracies from someone who didn't sign his name!

Let's start with stability for cross country. We had the opportunity to fly
a RV-6 for a few hours a few weeks ago to compare handling. The RV was
great but - the Lightning was its equal. The Lightning was more stable in
roll and about the same in pitch. The RV pitch forces got quite heavy with
advancing speed while Lightning's did not. If you are equating the
stability of Lightning to Esqual you are on the wrong track and your are
putting out an opinion not based on any fact. The Lightning is much
different from the Esqual in handling, stability, control response, and
general flight qualities. It is a more substantial aircraft all around.

The Lightning cruises 5 knots slower than the 160 hp RV 6 that we flew. On
a three hour flight that would equate to 6 minutes difference. Yes - it is
a bit slower but it uses 5.5 gph vs the 9 that the RV was using. On that
three hour flight with gas at $4.00 it cost $42 to gain those 6 minutes.

Engine maintenance is probably easier with the Jabiru engine. If you are out
in the boondocks you can get Jabiru plugs, dust caps, rotors, and even mags
at most auto stores. Try walking into your autozone in a town where there
is no aircraft maintenance and asking for parts for your Lycoming mag!
Granted, there are not many A&P's with Jabiru experience but the number is
growing and in a few short years there will be a selection of places near
home where you can take your Jabiru engine for repairs that cost far, far
less than a Lycoming repair.

As far as the "heating issues" you mention with Jabiru: those are
installation issues that are no fault of the engine. If a Lycoming was
installed with the same engineering as most of the Jabiru's with "heating
issues" were installed you'd be telling us about Lycomings with heating
issues - but you'd have to leave off the bit about smooth running. As far
as the Rotax being an alternative - only the earlier Esquals in Europe were
Rotax powered. Since 2003 when Jabiru was introduced as an option the vast
majority of Esquals have been Jabiru powered because performance and
reliability is better.

As far as structural strength - you are wrong again about Lightning. Esqual
probably is not as strong as an RV but Lightning is built stronger than the
Van's product. We can show you photos of Lightning wings loaded to 11 G
positive & negative. I'd like to see the Vans wing loaded to 11G. I have
the feeling there would be some crumpled metal.

The final point of your email is a good one - it needs to come down to pilot
preference. As you say - it's "your money, time, and life". That's why
when an unsigned email comes along with facts that are just wrong or
unsupported opinions disguised as facts - it is good to hear the other side.
That's what the internet is for, right? Anyone can say anything at any time
- right or wrong - and not take responsibility for it.

Pete

--


- 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
Daniel Vandenberg



Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:30 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

Doug...

Slightly off topic but....could you describe in a nutshell why the 914 is considered troublesome (other than the fact that it is hideously expensive)? Thanks.

Dan

Kayberg(at)aol.com wrote:[quote] In a message dated 8/18/2006 12:33:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, dashvii(at)hotmail.com writes:
Quote:
--> Lightning-List message posted by: "Brian Whittingham" <dashvii(at)hotmail.com>

IMile for mile, the Lightning should fly at a lower fuel cost. Engine
maintenance - I haven't talked with enough Jabiru people to feel like I have
a good comparison. It is easy to take the Lycoming O-360 to several places
near home no matter where you live for needed attention. The Jabiru doesn't
have the same options. It continues to suffer from heating issues but seems
to be a great little engine and is very smooth. An alternative to the Jabiru
might be the Rotax 912 or 914. Almost all of the Esquals flying in Europe
use the Rotax with favorable results. But again, even with the Rotax there
are not as many service options.



Just noting that the 3300 Jabiru horsepower exceeds both the 912 and troublesom 914...for less money than either. Also much easier to install a Jab engine that a 912. Every 912 install looks like a plumbers nightmare. Also note that a 912 should be considered [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
View user's profile Send private message
jackb911



Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:19 pm    Post subject: Re: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

Pete,

I feel like you just attacked me personally and openly for the post that I left. It's great on these forums to have an openess that allows each to give facts, varying opinions, and experiences. When you get personal with follow up replies, I think that you have gone too far and it stifles the openess. Please be more considerate.

I made what I felt were some very positive comments about the Lighting including:

- Lower fuel costs
- Great looks
- Smooth Jabiru
- Faster build time

I don't take back the negatives - those are how I feel. I was honest and clear in making the negatives comparing with the Esqual. I hope that the Lightning succeeds. Sometime I hope to get a ride in one.

Bottom line, it is ok to disagree, just don't get personal.

Jack


- 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
View user's profile Send private message
dashvii(at)hotmail.com
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:39 pm    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

Ok, We'll see if this works. This is the first time that I've tried to
post a photo on here. Attached is a picture of the BRS system installed in
the prototype before it was complete. You can see that it takes up over
1/3 of the room. If Pete doesn't have it I can try to take some
measurements of Earl's plane without the BRS on Monday and figure out the
baggage compartment dimensions. The baggage area goes nearly to the floor
behind the seats. On my trip out to AZ we each took a duffle and had enough
room to put at least another on the floor.

The other picture is the one of the wing being ground tested to the
equivalent of 11 G's. I believe the flex at the tip was over 1 foot, but it
didn't break! Just a couple of cool pictures. Hope Pete doesn't mind me
reposting some of their own pictures, as I did not take these. This is what
he was referring to though. If this works I'll see if I can post a couple
of Earl's plane on here at some point. Brian W.


- 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
vettin74(at)yahoo.com
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:38 pm    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

if anyone would like a play by play comparison between the lightning and a RV-6A i would be mor ethan happy to share, i have flown more than 100 hours in the lightning type aircraft and many hours in others including a intense flight check of a local RV-6A...i know how they both fly and can give an opinion of both with out speculation on how each may or may not perform.....

nick

jackb911 <jackb911(at)yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]--> Lightning-List message posted by: "jackb911"

Pete,

I feel like you just attacked me personally and openly for the post that I left. It's great on these forums to have an openess that allows each to give facts, varying opinions, and experiences. When you get personal with follow up replies, I think that you have gone too far and it stifles the openess. Get on board. [url=http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=40791/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/handraisers]You're invited[/url] to try the new Yahoo! Mail Beta. [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
pete(at)flylightning.net
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 2:44 pm    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

Jack, (glad you signed your name this time)

I didn't get personal. I didn't call names or anything like that. I just
responded with fact to several of your anecdotal points that were in error.
We all are entitled to an opinion but we should make it clear that it is our
opinion and take responsibility for it. As you can see I really get torqued
by unsigned emails that mention undefined negatives like "heating issues"
when I know from selling and installing hundreds of engines that the issues
are not engine issues. Usually negatives like that come from third hand
accounts of someone who did not know what he was doing in the first place.

I do disagree with many of your conclusions and that was stated in my
response. If you feel disagreeing with you is a personal attack - well I
think you are wrong there as well.

Pete

--


- 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
N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 3:56 pm    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

Hey Jack, Buz here.
This list is a great thing for sharing information with others when you have something informative to share. But my thoughts after reading some of your message were - he must have flown a really different Esqual than the ones I have flown and the engines must not have been installed correctly for good cooling. The heating issue you mention is totally an airframe installation situation - not an engine issue. So bottom line, I actually thought Pete went kind of easy with his response. My opinion.
Here are some other statements you made that I thought were misleading or hard to understand what you were really saying:
-You said: On a cross country platform it is my opinion that the Lightning will not be as stable or as fast as the RV.
Since I am pretty sure you have not flown a Lightning, how did you form this opinion? Actually, a stable cross country platform is probably some boring store bought C or P airframe. Sport aircraft will never be as stable as those - and generally no one that flys sport aircraft wants them to be. Will the Lightning be as fast on XC? That will depend on which Lightning and which RV-9A. Differences of opinions is what makes horse races. Heck, I have a friend building an RV-9A (has been doing so for many years) and I can't wait to blow by him in my Esqual.
-You said: Balanced control surfaces on the RV were great, the Esqual and I suspect the Lightning not as good.
I am confused by what you mean by balanced control surfaces. The Lightning has aerodynamic and statically balanced rudder and elevator - the Esqual does not. Are you maybe talking about control feel, or stick force per "G" perhaps, or rate of change of aircraft displacement based on some specific control input verses airspeed? Not sure what you are saying.

-You said: Stability for cross country was better in the RV than the Esqual
See above about sport aircraft and cross country , but my Esqual is a great cross country airplane. There is some required trim adjustment as you burn fuel, but you can easily trim it hands off. As long as you are above the bumpy air down low, it is as smooth a ride as my Bonanza was. 

-You mentioned the term: well harmonized control input.
Once again I am confused. I completely understand "harmonized controls" referring to control feel, but if we are talking "input" than that must be something that comes from the pilot.  If the pilot does not have at least good hands (mine are golden) then the input may not be well harmonized. Yes, I'm joshing with you here.

In closing, I hope you can understand why Pete was so concerned. There is just too much of the "old wives tales" type of information and "hangar talk" based on hearsay in aviation. We need to keep the information flow going, but it must be based on facts and not hearsay.
Well, I'm ready to jink-out if you are tracking and I am in your pipper, so take any shots. Seriously, the fact that you took the time to send your message shows that you care and some of your information was good. I would just caution you about opinions without facts.
Blue Skies,
Buz

[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
Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 3:40 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

In a message dated 8/18/2006 12:36:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, djvdb63(at)yahoo.com writes:
Quote:
Doug...

Slightly off topic but....could you describe in a nutshell why the 914 is considered troublesome (other than the fact that it is hideously expensive)? Thanks.

Dan



My view of troublesome is not from direct experience but stray anicdotes.

It is not easy to fabricate a mount for one and also fit it to the airframe in a way that will function well. It won't even fit on a SkyRanger for example.

It adds another level of fabrication and fitting to be sure the turbo will be happy.

Since it is more complex, it adds a few more concerns to flight...one must be sure all systems are functioning correctly. Most engines require some tweaking to achieve good performance. But as the complexity increases, the number of variables increases also. Setting multiple carbs is more complex than setting one for example.

Screwing up some of the tweaking shortens the life of such an engine.  That makes the high dollars go away faster!

Perhaps others have more detailed opinions.

Doug Koenigsberg
[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
Kayberg(at)AOL.COM
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 4:18 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

Jack,

Your post in question reminds me of someone discussing the pros and cons of two women he had never met. Meeting the sister of each and then infering their physical charactoristics and personalities based on that meeting is a bit speculative! Noting out loud that one sister has wide hips and the other broad shoulders therefore the unmet sisters should be similarly blessed, is bound to be corrected by those who really do know them! The sharpness of the correction will be directly related to the emotional investment of those who know!

Is it true your sister's behind was used as the model for the front of the new Mack Truck?

While I am just asking, it will be hard for you to not take it personally ....unless you have no sister or you find my question to be complimentary. I would expect you to respond in a personal manner since it involves an emotional investment. Hence the response of Pete and others.

Since I am a lover of irony, I did enjoy your personal attack on Pete for taking it personally!
(which he denies that it was personal) And I am going to deny this little post was personal (even tho we hope to be flying our Lightning in 3 weeks).

I enjoy a little rough and tumble on listserves. Cuts the boredom a bit. Thanks for contributing a little excitment, Jack. Smile Keep it up.

Doug Koenigsberg





In a message dated 8/18/2006 4:20:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, jackb911(at)yahoo.com writes:
Quote:
Pete,

I feel like you just attacked me personally and openly for the post that I left. It's great on these forums to have an openess that allows each to give facts, varying opinions, and experiences. When you get personal with follow up replies, I think that you have gone too far and it stifles the openess. Please be more considerate.

I made what I felt were some very positive comments about the Lighting including:

- Lower fuel costs
- Great looks
- Smooth Jabiru
- Faster build time

I don't take back the negatives - those are how I feel. I was honest and clear in making the negatives comparing with the Esqual. I hope that the Lightning succeeds. Sometime I hope to get a ride in one.

Bottom line, it is ok to disagree, just don't get personal.

Jack




[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
sky2000diver(at)yahoo.com
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 4:50 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

Doug, were you talking about my sisters? I think thats
very crude and rude of you to go off in a tangent
about someone you dont know like that! What nerve!
John
--- owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
<Kayberg(at)aol.com> wrote:
Quote:

Jack,

Your post in question reminds me of someone
discussing the pros and cons of

Quote:
two women he had never met. Meeting the sister of
each and then infering

Quote:
their physical charactoristics and personalities
based on that meeting is a

Quote:
bit speculative! Noting out loud that one sister
has wide hips and the other

Quote:
broad shoulders therefore the unmet sisters should
be similarly blessed, is

Quote:
bound to be corrected by those who really do know
them! The sharpness of the

Quote:
correction will be directly related to the
emotional investment of those who

Quote:
know!

Is it true your sister's behind was used as the
model for the front of the

Quote:
new Mack Truck?

While I am just asking, it will be hard for you to
not take it personally

Quote:
....unless you have no sister or you find my
question to be complimentary. I

Quote:
would expect you to respond in a personal manner
since it involves an

Quote:
emotional investment. Hence the response of Pete
and others.

Quote:

Since I am a lover of irony, I did enjoy your
personal attack on Pete for

Quote:
taking it personally!
(which he denies that it was personal) And I am
going to deny this little

Quote:
post was personal (even tho we hope to be flying our
Lightning in 3 weeks).

Quote:

I enjoy a little rough and tumble on listserves.
Cuts the boredom a bit.

Quote:
Thanks for contributing a little excitment, Jack.
Smile Keep it up.

Quote:

Doug Koenigsberg





In a message dated 8/18/2006 4:20:39 PM Eastern
Standard Time,

Quote:
jackb911(at)yahoo.com writes:

Pete,

I feel like you just attacked me personally and
openly for the post that I

Quote:
left. It's great on these forums to have an openess
that allows each to give

Quote:
facts, varying opinions, and experiences. When you
get personal with follow up

Quote:
replies, I think that you have gone too far and it
stifles the openess.

Quote:
Please be more considerate.

I made what I felt were some very positive comments
about the Lighting

Quote:
including:

- Lower fuel costs
- Great looks
- Smooth Jabiru
- Faster build time

I don't take back the negatives - those are how I
feel. I was honest and

Quote:
clear in making the negatives comparing with the
Esqual. I hope that the

Quote:
Lightning succeeds. Sometime I hope to get a ride in
one.

Quote:

Bottom line, it is ok to disagree, just don't get
personal.

Quote:

Jack







__________________________________________________


- 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
N1BZRich(at)AOL.COM
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 4:59 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

Hey John, How do you know Doug doesn't know your sisters? He really gets around.... and around..... and around. Wink
Blue Skies,
Buz
[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
cjk129(at)cox.net
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 5:09 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

Do we have a telephone number for even one of the sisters? Smile

Colin K.
OK


- 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
sky2000diver(at)yahoo.com
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 5:41 am    Post subject: RV-9A v. Lightening Reply with quote

This is really hurting my feelings, and they assured
me they dont know any of you. Shaniqua may get around
but she already has 4 boyfriends and a husband. Shes
too busy for any of you guys! ! !
--- owner-lightning-list-server(at)matronics.com
<N1BZRich(at)aol.com> wrote:
Quote:
Hey John, How do you know Doug doesn't know your
sisters? He really gets

Quote:
around.... and around..... and around. Wink
Blue Skies,
Buz


__________________________________________________


- 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
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Lightning-List All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
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


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group