X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 19:17:14 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.245] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.9) with ESMTP id 2075596 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 30 May 2007 18:53:39 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.132.245; envelope-from=jfcowell@gmail.com Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b2so734724ana for ; Wed, 30 May 2007 15:52:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=kpYFFAbS1RyrvKUw04jS2AxNSADQ3cQ1zuqAmf6BhcCauNRl/n3trA8W6wbt8lyuPINHr7qqMhbWIDFqwsBK3f+8PwlO+iFPcxAwZ8SL0c1Bihwg6qdwQZK4GZSUfiv7VrX6DmWL7hVo/QVfvP/nqmh1qyD/Bbe8KiqdozkY6vQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=YaVmafi4eYghcxSC5gaHHQ4icWAvrfmlVbUzso9/eOY5ZkUYzN/o4i/CHcZ2G0KGAMYrZiyIAjtwK5S6nZ6sY9vmr12zbEN51KJ4Xg8c/QBVk/hwPJmaiGvCPrK5LVQjBG55uUEYVjqJD2+G15lEaPgKOr6ALsW/q9exODSOHNY= Received: by 10.100.78.19 with SMTP id a19mr6365791anb.1180565532312; Wed, 30 May 2007 15:52:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.174.13 with HTTP; Wed, 30 May 2007 15:52:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-Message-ID: <9a1019e70705301552u53c4ae5eie7e255ba0f1017ad@mail.gmail.com> X-Original-Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 18:52:12 -0400 From: "Jack Cowell" X-Original-Sender: jfcowell@gmail.com X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" Subject: Re: [LML] Re: TSIO 550 LOP In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_14589_27590269.1180565532228" References: X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5e870466e33a5162 ------=_Part_14589_27590269.1180565532228 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline How* far* LOP are you at those numbers, Bob and on what is that LOP # based -- TIT, first cylinder to peak or ...? Also, what do you calculate your power percentage is at the numbers you provided? My TCM "guru" says stay at or below 70% power if you want the top end to live . On 5/30/07, Lancair wrote: > > Following this thread I have read a lot about pilots flying behind a > TSIO550 and burning 17.5 gph. My ES-P (7.5 CR) flys at FL250 set at 31.5" > and 2500 rpm, burning 15.5-16.0 gph LoP and showing a TAS of 230+kt. I > have a LightSpeed dual EI system and turn an MT 4-blade prop. > > Robert M. Simon > ES-P N301ES > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* PTACKABURY@aol.com [mailto:PTACKABURY@aol.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 29, 2007 11:00 PM > *To:* lml@lancaironline.net > *Subject:* Re: [LML] Re: TSIO 550 LOP > > > In a message dated 5/29/2007 11:10:10 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > walter@advancedpilot.com writes: > > OK, Paul, let's review the issue. > > Compression ratio: > The higher CR WILL ALWAYS result in a lower EGT/TIT if all else is held > constant. Why? Boyle's Law. PV = nRT. As the volume expands, the gas > temperature goes down. More expansion; more temp loss = lower EGT. > > Walter: > There is no issue here to review, so please step away from the tutorial > podium. I fat fingered my previous email and met 17.5 rather than 7.5 so > I was intending to compare a rate to a rate. Your simplistic physics > above is all just dandy, but *all else is never held constant.* The > timing recommended by the engine builder for a 8.5 and 7.5 are different, > the MP is different to recapture some of the detonation margin and so on. > All this has little to do with my original question which was at the same > rate of consumption of a precious resource, disposable income, what sort of > KIAS are LIV drivers achieving. You said in a previous email that a typical > cruise fuel flow LOP for the TSIO-550 is 17.5 gph so fine, what indicated > airspeeds are we seeing and if anyone now cares, if there are differences > what accounts for those differences. If higher CRs are more fuel efficient > as has been stated by many, well I would expect to see LIVs equip with those > engines cruising at 17.5gph attaining a higher indicated airspeed. I > chose KIAS because I thought it would simplify data collection. Simple > stuff, and since I did not spend my time building a test stand, meaningful > stuff at least for me. > paul > > > > ------------------------------ > See what's free at AOL.com . > > ------=_Part_14589_27590269.1180565532228 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline How far LOP are you at those numbers, Bob and on what is that LOP # based -- TIT, first cylinder to peak or ...? Also, what do you calculate your power percentage is at the numbers you provided? My TCM "guru" says stay at or below 70% power if you want the top end to live
.
On 5/30/07, Lancair <lancair-esp@ustek.com> wrote:
Following this thread I have read a lot about pilots flying behind a TSIO550 and burning 17.5 gph.  My ES-P (7.5 CR) flys at FL250 set at 31.5" and 2500 rpm, burning 15.5-16.0 gph LoP and showing a TAS of 230+kt.  I have a LightSpeed dual EI system and turn an MT 4-blade prop.
 
Robert M. Simon
ES-P N301ES
 

From: PTACKABURY@aol.com [mailto: PTACKABURY@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 11:00 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: TSIO 550 LOP

 
In a message dated 5/29/2007 11:10:10 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, walter@advancedpilot.com writes:
OK, Paul, let's review the issue.  

 
Compression ratio:
The higher CR WILL ALWAYS result in a lower EGT/TIT if all else is held constant.  Why?  Boyle's Law.  PV = nRT.  As the volume expands, the gas temperature goes down.  More expansion; more temp loss = lower EGT.
Walter:
There is no issue here to review, so please step away from the tutorial podium.  I fat fingered my previous email and met 17.5 rather than 7.5 so I was intending to compare a rate to a rate.  Your simplistic physics above is all just dandy, but all else is never held constant.  The timing recommended by the engine builder for a 8.5 and 7.5 are different, the MP is different to recapture some of the detonation margin and so on.  All this has little to do with my original question which was at the same rate of consumption of a precious resource, disposable income, what sort of KIAS are LIV drivers achieving.  You said in a previous email that a typical cruise fuel flow LOP for the TSIO-550 is 17.5 gph so fine, what indicated airspeeds are we seeing and if anyone now cares, if there are differences what accounts for those differences.  If higher CRs are more fuel efficient as has been stated by many, well I would expect to see LIVs equip with those engines cruising at 17.5gph attaining a higher indicated airspeed.  I chose KIAS because I thought it would simplify data collection.  Simple stuff, and since I did not spend my time building a test stand, meaningful stuff at least for me.
paul



See what's free at AOL.com.

------=_Part_14589_27590269.1180565532228--