Return-Path: Received: from [65.54.169.90] (HELO hotmail.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 3112000 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:12:06 -0500 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:12:06 -0800 Received: from 64.159.105.78 by BAY3-DAV60.phx.gbl with DAV; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 02:12:06 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [64.159.105.78] X-Originating-Email: [lors01@msn.com] X-Sender: lors01@msn.com From: "Tracy Crook" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Data? Was : Renesis & RD-1C drive testing Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 21:12:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MSN Explorer 7.02.0011.2700 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0004_01C40F89.29B3EC50" Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Mar 2004 02:12:06.0204 (UTC) FILETIME=[12CA7FC0:01C40FB3] ------=_NextPart_001_0004_01C40F89.29B3EC50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Ed, Wish I had more carefully documented fuel burn vs airspeed on the -B driv= e & old prop. But from the few well documented points that I have, it lo= oks about the same at 6.0 GPH (sea level) IAS, 143 - 148 depending on OAT= , humidity, etc (its amazing how much conditions affect things). This is= the only point I've had a chance to compare so far. I have not built th= e prop blade cuffs that I feel will be necessary to get best performance = from this combination. Clark at Performance Props was very honest about = the difficulty in getting the proper pitch at the blade root (out to ~ 3"= past the 13" dia. spinner) with pitch this high. This being the case, I= 'm very happy with the results so far. =20 Other conclusions are that anything less than 74" L prop is a waste on th= e -C drive. More would be better but that's as long as the -4 prop clear= ance would allow. =20 I can't measure static rpm (plane wants to skid on grass and/or nose over= ) but climb RPM is at 6200 at 120 mph (up from about 5200 with -B drive) = and VSI is pegged (hard!). Only did very brief test of WOT in level flig= ht and engine hit 7050 rpm. IAS was still climbing at 215 mph. Oil cool= ing has suffered due to stalled air around prop hub and reversed spiral o= f airflow due to RH prop. Erased several years of tweaking inlet shapes. Most unexpected finding so far is the radically improved glide at idle se= tting. Have no clue why. Would have expected worse instead of better. Tracy Hi Tracy, Experimentation can sure get exciting quickly, that's for sure. So h= ere we have the first successful cross-runway take off at Shady Bend, con= gratulations! I am interested in your static rpm with the 13B engine, big prop and 2.8= 5 drive, so I can calculate an approximation of your HP on take off - mig= ht be interesting to see how it stacks up against the old set up. Later = on of course interested in your fuel burn at same indicated airspeeds and= altitudes for a comparison with your old set up. Best Regards Ed =20 Ed Anderson RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Matthews, NC ------=_NextPart_001_0004_01C40F89.29B3EC50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Ed,

Wish I had more careful= ly documented fuel burn vs airspeed on the -B drive & old prop. = But from the few well documented points that I have, it looks about the = same at 6.0 GPH (sea level) IAS, 143 - 148 depending on OAT, humidity, et= c (its amazing how much conditions affect things). This is the only= point I've had a chance to compare so far. I have not built the pr= op blade cuffs that I feel will be necessary to get best performance from= this combination. Clark at Performance Props was very honest about= the difficulty in getting the proper pitch at the blade root (= out to ~ 3" past the 13" dia. spinner) with pitch this high. T= his being the case, I'm very happy with the results so far.

=

Other conclusions are that anything less than 74" = L prop is a waste on the -C drive. More would be better but that's = as long as the -4 prop clearance would allow.

I can't measure static rpm (plane wants to skid on grass and/or = nose over) but climb RPM is at 6200 at 120 mph (up from about 5200 with -= B drive) and VSI is pegged (hard!). Only did very brief test of WOT= in level flight and engine hit 7050 rpm. IAS was still climbing at= 215 mph. Oil cooling has suffered due to stalled air around prop h= ub and reversed spiral of airflow due to RH prop. Erased several ye= ars of tweaking inlet shapes.

Most unexpecte= d finding so far is the radically improved glide at idle setting. H= ave no clue why. Would have expected worse instead of better.

=

Tracy

&nb= sp;

Hi Tracy,

= Experimentation can sure get exciting quickly, that's for sure. So = here we have the first successful cross-runway take off at Shady Bend, co= ngratulations!

<= DIV> I am interested in your static rpm with the&= nbsp;13B engine, big prop and 2.85 drive, so I can calculate an approxima= tion of your HP on take off - might be interesting to see how it stacks u= p against the old set up. Later on of course interested in your fue= l burn at same indicated airspeeds and altitudes for a comparis= on with your old set up.

&nbs= p;

Best Regards

Ed

Ed Anderson
RV-6A= N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC

&nbs= p;

------=_NextPart_001_0004_01C40F89.29B3EC50--