Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 19:58:11 -0400
From: Blake Mantel <blakem@tiac.net>
Subject: COZY: Lightning

Oh to save some time:

http://www.lightningtech.com/intro.html

Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS
HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://www.tiac.net/users/blakem/
My Email address is altered due to the prevalence of bulk Email senders.

To send me mail remove the two *'s before the TIAC.NET.


From: "Nat Puffer" <cozy@extremezone.com>
Subject: COZY: Lightning strikes
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 08:49:24 -0500

Dear builders,
Lightning strikes is a subject which seems to come up over and over again.
We have been flying composite airplanes for 21 years now as well as
following any articles in the Canard Pusher and magazines that might apply.
We tend to stay well clear of any lightning activity, which you can usually
see miles away. Composite sailplanes have been flying in thermals under
clouds for many more years. My view is that since composite structures are
insulators, the lightning would tend to go around rather than through, but
still it is wise not to put this view to the test. I have never read of any
crash of a composite airplane due to a lightning strike. It is possible to
access the FAA accident records to see how many accidents were caused by
lightning. I would guess that it is the least likely accident cause. Having
a sticking fuel valve is probably 10 times or 100 times more likely. So why
do people keep bringing up this subject?
The rule I follow is that you have to define a problem first before
worrying about a solution. Unless someone has some facts that lightning is
a very serious threat to our airplanes, why talk about solutions?
Regards,
Nat

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 21:25:10 -0400
From: Blake Mantel <blakem@tiac.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Lightning strikes

Nat Puffer wrote:

> Dear builders,
> Lightning strikes is a subject which seems to come up over and over again.
> We have been flying composite airplanes for 21 years now as well as
> following any articles in the Canard Pusher and magazines that might apply.
> We tend to stay well clear of any lightning activity, which you can usually
> see miles away.

I don't know if it is just bad luck or what.

Somewhat over 10 years ago my fathers airplane (Piper Arrow 180)  was destroyed
by a rare tornado that hit in Windsor Locks, CT while tied down. Toasted plane
one.

And when we were flying back from Oshkosh we were being detoured well around a
cell when a leader reached out and touched us. Blew out the wingtip wiring and
toasted one radio. But the spam can survived with a new fiberglass wingtip
cover, radio, and wiring. Slightly toasted plane 2.


> I have never read of any
> crash of a composite airplane due to a lightning strike. It is possible to
> access the FAA accident records to see how many accidents were caused by
> lightning. I would guess that it is the least likely accident cause. Having
> a sticking fuel valve is probably 10 times or 100 times more likely. So why
> do people keep bringing up this subject?

Don't quite know....

Must be something to do with the current length of Burt's sideburns! ;-)

But honestly, it is a VERY remote chance of being struck. Ed Rupke from
Lighting Tech. said that most strikes upon aircraft are between 10,000 to
15,000 feet. An altitude that the Cozy is particularly at home at. And
visibility in the Northeast is quite often lacking, so IFR is a must. And IMHO
it would be a prudent to add the best lighting detection equipment you can
purchase. Since any composite structures is more susceptible to electrical
resistance damage than metallic.

Oh just to make everyone feel better. Ed also thinks that a large enough strike
to fatally damage an aircraft would also incapacitate the pilot.

> The rule I follow is that you have to define a problem first before
> worrying about a solution. Unless someone has some facts that lightning is
> a very serious threat to our airplanes, why talk about solutions?
> Regards,
> Nat

I know of only one composite strike on a LE, and it was survivable. But Ed
stated that this was probably one of the side leaders and not the main current
channel that hit it.

I guess that Glasair was concerned enough. But the unfortunate fact is that it
takes alot of work and makes a plane heavier and more $$$ to include this
protection. As well as some major structural changes that took up some interior
room in the cockpit.

Not to practical to institute on a Cozy so If you are going to fly IFR avoid
the whole "problem".

Later,
Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://www.tiac.net/users/blakem/
My Email address is altered due to the prevalence of bulk Email senders.
To send me mail remove the two *'s before the TIAC.NET.


From: mikefly@juno.com
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:22:51 -0500
Subject: Re: COZY: Lightning strikes

A long time ago, a fellow freight pilot told me that if I wanted to avoid
being struck by lightning, to avoid the temperature range between +4 & -4
C. In 8,000 hr. of charter flying, I was struck one time. I was in a
C-340 in moderate precip. The temp was +2 C. I am a believer.

FIW
Mike Bowden 

Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 19:54:41 -0400
From: Blake Mantel <blakem@tiac.net>
Subject: Re: COZY: Pilot at last!

cdenk@ix.netcom.com wrote:

> Congradulations also! Yes keep current, nibbling at an instrument rating would be good. The Cozy is a long haul aircraft and
> the nature of weather is there are fronts spaced out usually less distance than a easy days flight. The ability to go IFR
> certainly helps the ability to continue. BUT!! Single pilot IFR is a tough thing,

SNIP

Only problem with the Cozy (and almost all other composite aircraft) is that in IFR conditions one may run amok of an embedded
thunderstorm. And composite aircraft don't survive lightning strikes too well.

I had the good fortune to meet an engineer at Oshkosh and his company (Lightning Sys. Tech.) is just a stones throw away in
Pittsfield, Mass and he was able to visit our local EAA chapter. His presentation was very um, shocking, to say the least!

The best lightning avoidance equipment should be considered for any IFR composite craft.

Some more info:
http://www.nctn.hq.nasa.gov/innovation/Innovation15/Glasair.html

Later,
Blake
--
CUM CATAPULTAE PROSCRIPTAE ERUNT TUM SOLI PROSCRIPTI CATAPULTAS HABEBUNT.
(When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults....)
Triumph Tiger Motorcycle page at: http://www.tiac.net/users/blakem/
My Email address is altered due to the prevalence of bulk Email senders.
To send me mail remove the two *'s before the TIAC.NET.


From: cdenk@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 21:09:23 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: COZY: Pilot at last!

Was said <in IFR conditions one may run amok of an embedded thunderstorm>

I have a very firm rule (thats why we didn't get to the Butler Fly-in), If I can't get on top where visibility is 100 miles 
and be able to see a thunderstorm with very good assurance that there isn't any tstorms (even widely scattered or possibility) 
along the route, its NO GO! Here in tornado alley of Ohio (our county has the most for Ohio) Tstorms can pop out a relatively 
clear radar literally in minutes. Decent visibility under an overcast or broken layer simply doesn't count. MUST see the tops.

Although lightning is an issue, extreme turbulence is more of an issue, as far as I know there have been more crashes of all 
types aircraft due to the turbulence than Lightening.

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 18:14:03 -0400
From: "L. Wayne Hicks" <lwhicks@erols.com>
Subject: COZY: Re: lightning strikes 

Paul Krasa wrote:
> 
> snip
> 
> Composite aircraft can survive lightning strikes only if the materials are
> conductive.  

---------> And I'll say again that as pilots, we were all taught to
avoid T-storms like the plague.  It won't be the lightning that'll get
you first...it'll be the downburst that'll take you into the ground, or
rip your wings off first.  Use that cruise speed and circumnavigate.

PS--> No offense to you Paul, you and I have had this discussion before
and agree!  flown those hours off yet??? :-)

Wayne Hicks
Cozy IV #678 Chapter 18
http://www.geocities.com/yosemite/falls/2027

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 08:26:00 -0400
From: Paul Krasa <p.w.krasa@larc.nasa.gov>
Subject: lightning strikes was Re: COZY: Pilot at last!

snip

Composite aircraft can survive lightning strikes only if the materials are
conductive.  NASA sponsored a study conducted be Stoddard Hamilton to
develop lightning protection for non conductive composite materials like
fiberglass, and  nomex fiber (Kevlar{tm}).  The study was reported on in
Sport Aviation about 5 years ago.

As for our airplanes, there is no allowance for lightning protection in our
fiberglass airplanes, and flying near or around thunderstorms has a
significant increase in risk of sever damage if the airplane is struck by
lightning.  Fiberglass is an insulator, and will not conduct electricity.
A direct pulse strike of lightning to our airplanes on a flight surface
will probably result in a crash.  The associated charge will cause the foam
core to melt; the release of gas will cause the outer fiberglass skin to
rupture and the skin to peal off the core.  The final outcome depends on
the amount of charge and where the charge enters and exits the airframe.

Paul
Long EZ 214LP

