X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 12:12:47 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.62] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c3j) with ESMTP id 4982646 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:06:11 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.62; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=IqalYHkfJ4ZuvlTuf7h+mAceut3dApHHh6WyE51WDgPfcC6qwqabkB1GFWyqp5Fm; h=Received:From:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:To:References:Message-Id:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [216.57.118.194] (helo=[192.168.1.102]) by elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1QKtvq-0002vP-ST for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 13 May 2011 11:05:35 -0400 From: Colyn Case Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-113-574420364 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: N23PH Flight time X-Original-Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 11:05:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: X-Original-Message-Id: <220AF025-BC36-4C69-8B44-FEC3F24E9BE2@earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-ELNK-Trace: 63d5d3452847f8b1d6dd28457998182d7e972de0d01da940ec2af2f03ed959ef73a972d661267956350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 216.57.118.194 --Apple-Mail-113-574420364 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I don't have definitive information. As far as I know, never took HPAT or equivalent. As far as I know, total time in last 6 months was the 5 hours engine = breakin time. There were conflicting reports about whether the "pressure" problem was = oil pressure or fuel pressure. I believe he was intending to operate LOP on this trip. For the APS view on engine breakin see: = http://lists.kjsl.com/pipermail/beech-owners/2008-March/073658.html Anyone have LOP numbers for an IO-550 at 8000? Again the log records 3:17 of flight but does not include the climb (7 = minutes?) nor the descent ( 12 minutes? but was that power on or power off? one = thing very peculiar about the track log is that there is no descent.) 3:17 + 7 + 12 =3D 3:36 If you add 3 gallons for climb and take off, the total burns come out = like this: burn rate total burn 14 53.4 15 57 16 60.6 17 64.2 If he were really at 17 and knew it I think he would have done something = about it. I suspect there were other contributing factors. ...like faulty fuel = flow reporting, faulty fuel level gauging, max usable fuel less than = thought, or maybe it really was oil pressure. I looked at the google earth view for the general area. I'm not sure = which field he landed in but they all looked smallish and maybe = intimidating at speed. It's hard to know what happened in the final moments but the wreckage = doesn't look consistent with forward progress once on the ground. On May 12, 2011, at 9:26 AM, MikeEasley@aol.com wrote: > Do we know this was fuel exhaustion? I know I ran my IO-550 150+ = degrees ROP throughout the break-in process. I also flew low to keep = 75% power. That's at or above 15 GPH. > =20 > I thought I read something about oil pressure. I guess we'll find out = more in time. Only 5 hours on a newly rebuilt engine seems minimal = before a long cross country. A rebuilt engine doesn't constitute a = major modification, so there's really no need to re-enter Phase 1 flight = testing for a minimum of 5 hours, unless there was more work done that = just an R&R. > =20 > Losing an engine shouldn't be fatal. What do we know about the pilot = and his training, time in type, etc.? Maybe Colyn can give us a bit = more about the pilot's experience. > =20 > Just sorting through the scenario like I do with every Lancair = accident. > =20 > Mike Easley > Colorado Springs > =20 > In a message dated 5/11/2011 1:17:19 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, = edmartintx@aol.com writes: > At high altitude, a stock Legacy with IO-550 should burn = approximately 10.5 gallons/hour using "lean-of-peak" technique. In = this example, actual flight time was over four hours with 21 gallons = remaining (66-gallon capacity). Please see: = http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N767EM =20 >=20 > J. E. MARTIN > -----Original Message----- > From: Karen Farnsworth > To: lml > Sent: Tue, May 10, 2011 11:22 am > Subject: [LML] Re: N23PH Crash >=20 > =20 > =20 > From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = Tom McNerney > Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 07:33 > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Subject: [LML] Re: N23PH Crash > =20 > Flight Aware shows 3 hours 50 min, not 3 hours 15 min. That is a long = way on 60 gallons.. > =20 > Tom > www.N54SG.com > =20 > If, as has been reported, the engine was new, I would think that it = was still being broken in. This would lead me to thing that fuel flow = would be on the high side; thus reducing range. > =20 > Just a thought. > =20 > Lynn Farnsworth --Apple-Mail-113-574420364 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii I = don't have definitive information.
As far as I know, never took HPAT = or equivalent.
As far as I know, total time in last 6 months = was the 5 hours engine breakin time.
There were conflicting = reports about whether the "pressure" problem was oil pressure or fuel = pressure.
I believe he was intending to operate LOP on this = trip.
For the APS view on engine breakin see:  http://lists.kjsl.com/pipermail/beech-owners/2008-March/073658.html=
Anyone have LOP numbers for an IO-550 at = 8000?

Again the log records 3:17 of flight = but does not include the climb (7 minutes?)
nor the descent ( = 12 minutes? but was that power on or power off? one thing very peculiar = about the track log is that there is no descent.)
3:17 + 7 + = 12 =3D 3:36
If you add 3 gallons for climb and take off, the = total burns come out like this:

burn rate     =     total burn

14               =  53.4
15               =  57
16               =  60.6
17               =  64.2

If he were really at 17 and knew it I think he would have = done something about it.
I suspect there were other contributing factors.   = ...like faulty fuel flow reporting, faulty fuel level gauging, max = usable fuel less than thought,  or maybe it really was oil = pressure.

I looked at the google earth view for the general area. =  I'm not sure which field he landed in but they all looked smallish = and maybe intimidating at speed.
It's hard to know what = happened in the final moments but the wreckage doesn't look consistent = with forward progress once on the ground.

On May = 12, 2011, at 9:26 AM, MikeEasley@aol.com = wrote:

Do we know this was fuel exhaustion? I know I ran my IO-550 150+=20 degrees ROP throughout the break-in process.  I also flew low = to keep=20 75% power. That's at or above 15 GPH.
 
I thought I read something about oil pressure. I guess we'll find = out more=20 in time.  Only 5 hours on a newly rebuilt engine seems minimal = before a=20 long cross country.  A rebuilt engine doesn't constitute a major=20 modification, so there's really no need to re-enter Phase 1 flight = testing for a=20 minimum of 5 hours, unless there was more work done that just an = R&R.
 
Losing an engine shouldn't be fatal.  What do we know about = the pilot=20 and his training, time in type, etc.?  Maybe Colyn can give us a = bit more=20 about the pilot's experience.
 
Just sorting through the scenario like I do with every Lancair=20 accident.
 
Mike Easley
Colorado Springs
 
In a message dated 5/11/2011 1:17:19 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time,=20= edmartintx@aol.com = writes:
        &nb= sp; At=20 high altitude, a stock Legacy with IO-550 should burn approximately = 10.5=20 gallons/hour using "lean-of-peak" technique.    In this=20= example, actual flight time was over four hours with 21 gallons = remaining=20 (66-gallon capacity).  Please see:   http://flightaware.com/= live/flight/N767EM =20

J. E. MARTIN
-----Original=20 Message-----
From: Karen Farnsworth <farnsworth@charter.net>
T= o:=20 lml <lml@lancaironline.net>
Sen= t: Tue, May 10, 2011 11:22=20 am
Subject: [LML] Re: N23PH Crash

 
 
From: Lancair=20 Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net]=20= On Behalf Of Tom=20 McNerney
Sent: = Monday, May=20 09, 2011 07:33
To: = lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: N23PH=20 Crash
 
Flight Aware shows 3 hours 50 = min, not 3 hours=20 15 min.  That is a long way on 60 = gallons..
 
Tom
www.N54SG.com=20
 
If, as has been=20 reported, the engine was new, I would think that it was still being = broken in.=20 This would lead me to thing that fuel flow would be on the high side; = thus=20 reducing range.
 
Just a=20 thought.
 
Lynn=20 = Farnsworth
=

= --Apple-Mail-113-574420364--