----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any
advice in this forum.]----



Are there Coupe records in the public domain (i.e. FAA records)?  It would
be nice to fine some that could be cited as engineering justification for
a
blanket STC to allow split elevator on all Coupes?

Ed Burkhead
Beginning Challenger II builder
Peoria, Illinois
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://edburkhead.home.insightbb.com/



> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 2:09 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [COUPERS-FLYIN] Re: [COUPERS-FLYIN]
>
>
> ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before
> following any advice in this forum.]----
>
>
> Dear Halmut,
> I do believe that more HP is better on the Ercoupe. I
> agree with you. Also I believe that the split tail is a
> great benefit. But the safety issue is still operating
> the airplane within the constrains of the airplanes
> limitations. If you have to come over the fence at 80,
> then you make those plans to do that. Its what that
> airplane needs to do. I too like the idea of being able
> to operate at a lower speed, but without the split tail,
> I cannot. So I keep within the airplanes capabilities.
> That makes it safe, and most of all, me alive.
> My C-85 with the STC for O200 parts is performing well
> better then I would have expected. Soon I will have a
> freshly covered set of wings and pull off the metal
> ones. That too should give me better performance. One
> day, I will find a split tail and it too will be added
> to the figures.
>
> Alan
>
> PS,  If I wanted flaps, I could have bought a Cessna,
> but don't ruin a good thing. I like my coupe. ;)
> > ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before
> following any advice
> > in this forum.]----
> >
> >
> > Dear Alan.
> > When I was trying top put the C-90 engine in plane, my
> mechanic agreed
> > that more horsepower is always good, making it safer to fly.
> > Thinking a little bit further I believe that anything what makes you
> > land slower is also good for you and your plane. That's why
> planes are
> > using flaps. It is all about the feel of safety with a
> slower landing speed.
> > In that regard see the split elevator as the flaps for an Ercoupe.
> > Coupes stall around 56  fully loaded at 1400## and around
> some thirty
> > miles with empty tanks and only a pilot in there. But yet,
> if you happen
> > to own a 415-D you are required to come over the fence at 80 miles
> > because your elevator restriction does not allow you to
> flare the damn
> > thing otherwise.
> > This is silly and also dangerous when trying a spot landing
> in a short
> > field in an emergency.
> > There are circumstances where a pilot has a limited choice. I think
> > having more choices makes the Aircraft safer to fly.
> > I would not want to miss my split tail, giving me the option to land
> > short and slow. There might be a day when I need to do exactly that.
> >
> > Hartmut
> >
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm
> before following any
> > advice in this forum.]---
> > > Harlmut, I do not agree with you as far as the safety of
> > > the straight tail as compared to the split tail. Both
> > > are great, safe aircraft. The split tail just allows for
> > > slower speed ops. You just have to know the limits of
> > > the airplane you are operating. It's the pilot, in this
> > > case, that makes the safe operations.
> >
> > ==================================================================
> > TO UNSUBSCRIBE go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm
> >
> >
> >
> ==================================================================
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm
>
>
>
>


==================================================================
TO UNSUBSCRIBE go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm



<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to