Jeff Scott wrote: > I tested both with and without the gap > seals. With several climbs to altitude and several speed runs. I > found no discernible difference in the performance numbers of my > aircraft between flying with and without the gap seals.
I think the difference may be that you can follow the plans and end up with a big gap at the lower front edge of the aileron, or you can take some care and design the nose of the aileron so that it comes close to sealing itself. I'll throw out that perhaps Troy's RAF48 "per-plans" ailerons may have had a big gap at the bottom during straight-ahead flight, whereas both mine (N56ML) and yours likely seal better at the nose and therefore do a better job of sealing themselves, so gap seals don't help in our case. I can't vouch for Troy's experience, but can verify my own with the AS5048 wing and Frise ailerons....no discernible difference with gap seals installed. Just FYI, N891JF came with gap seals installed, and I haven't noticed a lot of difficulty in making turns. But I also haven't experienced a stellar climb rate either. Maybe I need to do some testing, rip them off, and do some more testing. I'll have to find a fish scale that measures in grams though, instead of ounces of force. What I really need is a Corvair hanging off the nose of this thing! While we're on the subject of gap seals, I'll throw this out. If you're ever tempted to fly around the patch without the gap seals between stub wing and outer wing installed, be prepared for a dramatically lowered climb rate. And if you do it with only one missing and the other installed, be prepared for a serious roll tendency! How do I know this? Experimentation... Mark Langford ML at N56ML.com http://www.n56ml.com
