Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 16:47:06 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-4901105@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=70.33.152.2; envelope-from=WeinsweigD@tsnci.com
From: "Dr. Weinsweig" <WeinsweigD@tsnci.com>
Subject: [LML] Re: LNC4 Observed Performance?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

hi colyn et al,

climb rates can vary significantly with power settings/fuel burn as
well as kias/angle of attack.

i generally maintain 160-180 kias to altitude as i don't like worrying
about angle of attack/airspeed when i'm busy during climbout(and this is
what i was taught).  

generally i start at around 2500 fpm through 10,000 ft(as long as atc
cooperates in my climb!) then it drops to around 2000-2500 fpm.  mid to
high teens 1500-2000 fpm then 1000-1500 fpm in the flight levels still
maintaining 160+ kias

again i could get higher roc with reduced ias(and best climb) but to
get to altitude never seems very long and i like the forward progress of
speed!

descent rates can be mind boggling.  during my training practicing
emergency descents at altitude i pulled the power to flight idle and
pointed the nose down and glanced at the cheltons which showed a brief
vsi of -9900 fpm at around 250kias!  i routinely descend at 2000-2500
fpm and sometimes will set the a/p to descend at 3000 fpm which is the
highest setting the sorcerer will do.  stay high as long as possible or
as long as atc will allow in a turbine.

watta plane!

david weinsweig
n750dw propjet

>>> colyncase@earthlink.net 03/09/2011 8:26 AM >>>
David can you post your climb rates all the way to fl250?

On Mar 8, 2011, at 3:54 PM, Dr. Weinsweig wrote:

> hi craig,
> 
> although obviously biased i feel that the turbine ivp ie propjet is
the
> way to go.  
> 
> i see right around 300ktas from fl180(39 gph) to fl280(29gph) and
> typically 32-33 gph at fl250 in my tks deiced propjet.  with 146
gallons
> usable i can comfortably plan for 900 nm and still have over an hour
for
> reserves.
> 
> yes fuel burn is higher and range slightly less than a piston but
when
> you add climb/descent rates, short field advantages(due to power and
> prop beta), perceived reliability, the smell of jet a, and the
coolness
> factor it is hard to beat!
> 
> just my $.02 fwiw,
> 
> david weinsweig
> n750dw propjet 233 hrs- still for sale(need a family plane now) but
> lovin' her
> 304-633-5221
> weinsweigd@gmail.com 
> 
> 
>>>> cj@AwlBiz.com 03/02/2011 9:31 PM >>>
> If this is posted elsewhere, please point me to the data.
> 
> The Lancair site says a piston IV-P will do 330 mph (~286 KTAS) at
> FL240. 
> I'd be interested in what speed and fuel-flow you guys see at
> sustainable
> power settings at various altitudes.
> 
> Most of you flying LOP?  I'm going to the APS class this Friday in
> Ada.
> 
> How much speed do you lose equipping with the thermal or TKS icing
> products?
> 
> Although probably beyond my budget, I'd also be interested in
similar
> data
> for turbine-powered IVPs.
> 
> My typical flight is 720 nm Oklahoma City to Phoenix, MEA 13000',
> prevailing westerlies, 1-2 people and 50 lb stuff.  The Mooney M20J
> does
> great on non-stop range and economy, but I'm evaluating options for
> going
> a lot faster, and preferably with at least inadvertent ice equipment.

> Currently thinking Mooney Rocket, P-Baron, IV, IVP...?  Thoughts on
> appropriate planes would be welcomed.
> 
> Craig
> 
> 
> --
> For archives and unsub
> http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html 
> 
> --
> For archives and unsub
http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html 


--
For archives and unsub
http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html