----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----
Darwin. Despite what everyone will report on the split elevator, a conversion to it is worth the money and effort. I do fly a 415-c with a split elevator. And I do not want to miss it. All the discussions about what speed is best at approach is not an issue for me. In my plane I pick my approach path and I slow down to what I feel is save and good an I STILL can flare my plane. In my opinion the split elevator is adding much more safety to the Ercoupe than anyone would like to admit. It RESTORES the actual intended flying behavior of the original Ercoupe. Even the stock model C is already limited in its elevator travel. But listen to me, before you think on converting and upgrading fly your Coupe first. get a feel for it. The C is not too bad after all. You can put a 85 hp engine in it and keep your elevator travel the way it is. Why would you want to "upgrade" to lesser elevator usage and also go through the money drain of putting the stainless steel on top ? What for ? Just to be able to say you can legally take off with 1400# gross? Are you flying always with two people and full tanks?? Even if legally allowed , it is sometimes not advised to get the plane fully loaded. (high altitude, warm day take off) The D - conversion is only making sense when you want to put a O-200 in it( which is also not giving you much gain ) . But id you must change things and you want the higher gross weight I strongly recommend to get a hold on a split elevator and get the thing thoroughly done. The split elevator has a spring stop where the C-model elevator would end in travel. I fly my approach on that spring. On flare I still have two more inches of travel.. That way the Coupe can land anywhere and in a emergency situation I can pick my spot and make a short field landing like in the books. The elevator sure cost some money new. In the last two years UNIVAIR managed to raise the price from $1400 to $ 1800 for it. That is ridiculous . The added safety and convenience of that elevator is in my eyes of much more value than that stainless steel addition. I don't mean to skip the stainless steel top. But it just does not do anything to the plane. The split elevator on the other hand is making the Coupe to a very handy Aircraft. hartmut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]---- > > Darwin, > > I don't know the cost comparrison - but I expect it will be about a $1000 + > to change the elevator, and re-rig the controls. > > I see No need to change the elevator for most cases. What the elevator does > is allow very slow landings - similar to the C model; about 10 mph slower > than the D model specs ( 9 deg up travel). > > If you are on a short grass strip, it would be nice. but other wise, > approaching at about 75 down final allows sufficient elevator control to > flare and land softly. The C model with 13 deg up travel allows a steeper > angle of attack and thus slower approach speeds. The split elevator with 22 > deg up travel also allows the slower approach speeds. > > The reason for the split elevator is that with the limited 9 degrees up > travel the landing approach was higher than the factory deemed > satisfactory...in 1946.... Today, an approach speed of 75 is right there with > the cessna, pipers ,etc...and with long paved runways, there is no need for > short field landings. > > The reason for the linitation (9 degrees up travel) is that with 1400 # , the > coupe could approach stall with full power and full up elevator when using > the original 13 deg up travel. Thus, the factory limited the up travel to > prevent full power stalls ( result of prop wash against the elevator). By > installing the cut-out elevator, the prop wash went thru the cut out, and had > insignificent effect on the full power climb, but allowed a slower power off > approach with 22 deg up travel. It is a neat solution. > > I once decided to install the cut out, but after thorough evaluation and cost > considerations, I decided I did not need the slower approach speed. If I > needed to make a soft field landing, I could make a nose high power approach > and accomplish the same thing. > > You may want to contact John Wright, Jr. about a cut out elevator. He told me > he has several available. I do not know the cost. 217-698-8243. > > Regards, > > Harry Francis > ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Sid.bAhN69 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
