X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 1 [X] Return-Path: Received: from imr-ma03.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.41] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.9) with ESMTP id 4464509 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 23:17:41 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.206.41; envelope-from=Bktrub@aol.com Received: from imo-da02.mx.aol.com (imo-da02.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.200]) by imr-ma03.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o8D3GthW004176; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 23:16:55 -0400 Received: from Bktrub@aol.com by imo-da02.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.9.) id f.cef.78b7965b (34940); Sun, 12 Sep 2010 23:16:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtprly-md02.mx.aol.com (smtprly-md02.mx.aol.com [64.12.143.155]) by cia-da05.mx.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILCIADA051-d41f4c8d97a0222; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 23:16:50 -0400 Received: from webmail-m042 (webmail-m042.sim.aol.com [64.12.101.225]) by smtprly-md02.mx.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYMD025-d41f4c8d97a0222; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 23:16:48 -0400 References: To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net, tcrook@rotaryaviation.com, rotaryeng@earthlink.net Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 23:16:48 -0400 X-AOL-IP: 108.3.31.54 In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: bktrub@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CD21093CAF67FF_190C_2565A_webmail-m042.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 32644-STANDARD Received: from 108.3.31.54 by webmail-m042.sysops.aol.com (64.12.101.225) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Sun, 12 Sep 2010 23:16:48 -0400 Message-Id: <8CD21093CA843CD-190C-1B638@webmail-m042.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag:NO X-AOL-SENDER: Bktrub@aol.com ----------MB_8CD21093CAF67FF_190C_2565A_webmail-m042.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Was it the restrictive air filter? No. Was it tuning? No. Was it a restric= tive exhaust? No. Was it the stupid $@%^& spring that I used to pull the= throttle open in case of a broken cable? Uh -huh! Re-configured it, now= , instead of getting 4400 RPM and 100 hp, I get 5600 and 190 hp on a stati= c ground run. The brakes can barely hold the plane back at full throttle= on pavement. Next flight should be on tuesday.=20 Brian Trubee -----Original Message----- From: Ed Anderson To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Sun, Sep 12, 2010 10:04 am Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight Brian, If using the 2.85:1 then 4800 rpm is definitely on the low side, Tr= acy was referring to his rpm of 4800 when using the 2.71:1. With my old= 13B and a 2.85:1, I get 6000 rpm static with a 75x88 prop, so I would say= you need to be above 5500 rpm. I think you stated you reached that with= the cowl off.=20 =20 Check and make certain that there are not any intake hoses to/from the th= rottle body that can collapse or close/clamp down. I know of one situatio= n where an air filter apparently cause just enough lower pressure in an in= take to cause the intake hose the builder was using from TB to manifold to= crush and restrict air flow. Once the filter was removed the problem wo= uld clear up - it took longer than you might think to discover that was th= e problem. =20 So if you can get 5500 rpm without cowl and only 4800 with cowl/filter -= something is a miss. =20 At 4800 rpm 14.7:1 air fuel ratio, you are making around 115 Hp, assum= ing you have it rich (12.65:1) then its around 130 HP. I flew on around= 130 Hp for the first year or so it took me to get my problem identified= and fixed. The RV will fly fine (if a little lacking in performance on= take off and climb) on 130 HP, my top speed was 186 MPH - not steriling= for an RV but better than most single engine certified by far. =20 Go get'er done =20 Ed From: Bktrub@aol.com=20 Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2010 12:00 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight I'm using the 2.85 to one, I'll try some tuning first before I remove the= air filter. It's easier to turn a know than to remove the air filter. I'm= pretty sure I'm running way too rich.=20 =20 Brian Trubee =20 ----------MB_8CD21093CAF67FF_190C_2565A_webmail-m042.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Was it the restrictive air filter? No.= Was it tuning? No. Was it a restrictive exhaust? No. Was it the= stupid $@%^& spring that I used to pull the throttle open in case of= a broken  cable? Uh -huh!  Re-configured it, now, instead of ge= tting 4400 RPM and 100 hp, I get 5600 and 190 hp on a static ground run. The br= akes can barely hold the plane back at full throttle on pavement.

Next fli= ght should be on tuesday. 

Brian Tr= ubee



----= -Original Message-----
From: Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sun, Sep 12, 2010 10:04 am
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight

Brian, If using the 2.85:1 then 4800 rpm is definite= ly on the=20 low side, Tracy was referring to his rpm of 4800 when using the 2.71:1.&nb= sp;=20 With my old 13B and a 2.85:1, I get 6000 rpm static with a 75x88 prop, so= I=20 would say you need to be above 5500 rpm.  I think you stated you reac= hed=20 that with the cowl off. 
 
 Check and make certain that there are not any= intake=20 hoses to/from the throttle body that can collapse or close/clamp down.&nbs= p; I=20 know of one situation where an air filter apparently cause just enough low= er=20 pressure in an intake to cause the intake hose the builder was using from= TB to=20 manifold to crush and restrict air flow.   Once the filter was= removed=20 the problem would clear up - it took longer than you might think to discov= er=20 that was the problem.
 
So if you can get 5500 rpm without cowl and only 480= 0 with=20 cowl/filter - something is a miss.
 
At 4800 rpm 14.7:1 air fuel ratio, you are making=20 around   115 Hp,   assuming you have it rich (12.65:1)= then=20 its around 130 HP.  I flew on around 130 Hp for the first year or so= it=20 took me to get my problem identified and fixed.  The RV will fly fine= (if a=20 little lacking in performance on take off and climb) on 130 HP, my top spe= ed was=20 186 MPH - not steriling for an RV but better than most single engine certi= fied=20 by far.
 
Go get'er done
 
Ed

Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2010 12:00 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight

I'm using the 2.85 to one, I'll try some tuning first before I remove= the=20 air filter. It's easier to turn a know than to remove the air filter. I'm= pretty=20 sure I'm running way too rich.
 
Brian Trubee
----------MB_8CD21093CAF67FF_190C_2565A_webmail-m042.sysops.aol.com--