X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 2 [X] Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2007 12:09:20 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from ironport5.liveoakmail.com ([216.110.12.21] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.8) with ESMTP id 1960793 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 01 Apr 2007 11:28:18 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.110.12.21; envelope-from=walter@advancedpilot.com Received: from rs5.liveoakhosting.com (HELO secure5.liveoakhosting.com) ([64.49.254.21]) by ironport5.liveoakmail.com with ESMTP; 01 Apr 2007 10:27:30 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ah4FAO9rD0ZAMf4VeWdsb2JhbACCVDWBT4svAQEJDio X-IronPort-AV: i="4.14,358,1170655200"; d="scan'208,217"; a="7937972:sNHT76212878" Received: (qmail 10897 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2007 10:27:30 -0500 Received: from ip68-108-233-213.br.br.cox.net (HELO ?10.0.1.3?) (68.108.233.213) by rs5.liveoakhosting.com with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 1 Apr 2007 10:27:30 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-1--434465276 X-Original-Message-Id: <15397409-CB47-4258-BE12-A79FB11B4184@advancedpilot.com> From: Walter Atkinson Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Thielert Diesel Centurion 4.0 X-Original-Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 10:27:10 -0500 X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) --Apple-Mail-1--434465276 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Ya think? The cooling drag increase can be in the 15-20% range. Now, calculate the increased HP required to overcome that increase in drag. It's not insignificant. Were this simple to address the diesel aircraft would be faster and more efficient than they are. Walter On Mar 31, 2007, at 9:14 PM, REHBINC@aol.com wrote: Scott, Now that's what I like about the LML. I asked a question and in less than an hour someone provides an answer. Thanks. So using this info in the previous scenario, a 10% change in cooling load would result in a 2% change in total drag. I like fast with payload, so I probably wouldn't be a diesel candidate. But 2% more drag is certainly not the end of the aviator's world. Even at full power a diesel is typically 3-5% more efficient than gas. Rob See what's free at AOL.com. --Apple-Mail-1--434465276 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Ya think? <g>

The cooling drag increase = can be in the 15-20% range.=A0 Now, calculate the increased HP required = to overcome that increase in drag.=A0 It's not insignificant.=A0 Were = this simple to address the diesel aircraft would be faster and more = efficient than they are.

Walter


On Mar 31, = 2007, at 9:14 PM, REHBINC@aol.com = wrote:

Scott,
=
=A0
Now that's what I like about the LML. I asked a = question and in less than an hour someone provides an answer. = Thanks.
=A0
So using this info in the previous = scenario, a 10% change in cooling load would result in a 2% change in = total drag. I like fast with payload, so I probably wouldn't be=A0a = diesel candidate. But 2% more drag=A0is certainly not the end of the = aviator's=A0world. Even at full power a diesel is typically 3-5% more = efficient than gas.
=A0
=
Rob



See what's free = at AOL.com. =

= --Apple-Mail-1--434465276--