Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.64; envelope-from=atlasyts@bellsouth.net
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
In-Reply-To: <list-1514977@logan.com>
References: <list-1514977@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <99B0031E-61E0-4C41-95FC-2B78C5C1CC04@bellsouth.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Bulent Aliev <atlasyts@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] FW: Velocity 20B update
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 20:48:44 -0500
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>

Looks like you have one impressive plane Al. Did you get checked out =20
in it, or still paying a hired pilot?
Buly
On Oct 30, 2006, at 2:37 PM, Al Gietzen wrote:

> Just to let you know that flight testing is continuing, and we=92ve =20=

> just passed 15 hours of flight time.  Overall, the plane and engine =20=

> are doing fine.  Things are trimmed out now for straight and true =20
> handling. The remaining issue is too much canard lift, even after =20
> reducing incidence by a bit over 1 degree. It limits high speed end =20=

> (run out of elevator to keep it from climbing), and requires pretty =20=

> hot landing (over the fence at 90 KIAS). The consensus of the =20
> experts is to shorten the canard (cut about 4=94 sections out of both =20=

> sides).  Ouch!!
>
>
> I am very pleased with the operation of the 3=96rotor rotary engine =96 =
=20
> in spite of few glitches still with the ECU, apparently some sort =20
> of electrical noise issue.  It starts easily hot or cold, runs =20
> smooth, plenty of power, and easy one-lever operation. Haven=92t =20
> established top end yet, but did get up to about 205 KTAS (175 KIAS =20=

> at DA of close to 10,000 ft), and there was still some to go.  =20
> After gear up on takeoff the VSI strip pegs out at 1000 fpm with =20
> close to 2100 # total weight. If you want fast descent; gear down, =20
> power off (no worries about shock cooling), and push both rudders =20
> out. Nice high controlled sink rate.
>
>
> No good data yet on fuel burn.  I think it was calibrated fairly =20
> close, and read about 13 gph at about 160 indicated, but then the =20
> EM2 suddenly started reading about half that number, and I haven=92t =20=

> figured that out yet.  Lots of work and testing left to do.
>
>
> Al
>
>
>
>
>
>