X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com 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 4465182 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:54:08 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.206.41; envelope-from=SHIPCHIEF@aol.com Received: from imo-ma03.mx.aol.com (imo-ma03.mx.aol.com [64.12.78.138]) by imr-ma03.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o8DGrKV5015110 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:53:20 -0400 Received: from SHIPCHIEF@aol.com by imo-ma03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.9.) id q.ef0.77a42ba (43964) for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:53:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtprly-ma01.mx.aol.com (smtprly-ma01.mx.aol.com [64.12.207.140]) by cia-dd02.mx.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILCIADD025-5c4a4c8e56f7c1; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:53:17 -0400 Received: from webmail-m025 (webmail-m025.sim.aol.com [64.12.183.108]) by smtprly-ma01.mx.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYMA018-5c4a4c8e56f7c1; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:53:11 -0400 References: To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:53:11 -0400 X-AOL-IP: 24.19.204.151 In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: shipchief@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CD217B48840117_127C_C96_webmail-m025.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 32644-STANDARD Received: from 24.19.204.151 by webmail-m025.sysops.aol.com (64.12.183.108) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Mon, 13 Sep 2010 12:53:11 -0400 Message-Id: <8CD217B487F3E55-127C-5F8@webmail-m025.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag:NO X-AOL-SENDER: SHIPCHIEF@aol.com ----------MB_8CD217B48840117_127C_C96_webmail-m025.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Yay Brian!! I'm watching you while I build away! Test flying a new plane and new engin= e is a lot to deal with. I'm relieved that you found it on the ground. -----Original Message----- From: bktrub@aol.com To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Sun, Sep 12, 2010 8:16 pm Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight 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.=20 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 ----------MB_8CD217B48840117_127C_C96_webmail-m025.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Yay Brian!!
I'm watching you while I build away! Test flying a new plane and new= engine is a lot to deal with. I'm relieved that you found it on the= ground.



-----Original Message-----
From: bktrub@aol.com
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sun, Sep 12, 2010 8:16 pm
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: First flight

Was it the restrictive air filter? No. Was it tuning? No. Was= it a restrictive exhaust? No. Was it the stupid $@%^& sprin= g 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 static ground run. The brakes can barely hold the= plane back at full throttle on pavement.=20

Next flight= should be on tuesday. 

Brian Trube= e



-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Anderson <eanders= on@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 definitely= on the low side, Tracy 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 75x= 88 prop, so I would say you need to be above 5500 rpm.  I think you= stated you reached that with the cowl off. 
 
 Check and make certain that there are not any in= take hoses to/from the throttle body that can collapse or close/clamp down= .  I know of one situation where an air filter apparently cause just= enough lower pressure in an intake 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 would clear up - it took longer= than you might think to discover that was the problem.
 
So if you can get 5500 rpm without cowl and only 4800= with cowl/filter - something is a miss.
 
At 4800 rpm 14.7:1 air fuel ratio, you are making arou= nd   115 Hp,   assuming you have it rich (12.65:1) the= n 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 13= 0 HP, my top speed was 186 MPH - not steriling for an RV but better than= most single engine certified 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 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.
 
Brian Trubee
 ----------MB_8CD217B48840117_127C_C96_webmail-m025.sysops.aol.com--