X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 20:48:45 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imr-db01.mx.aol.com ([205.188.91.95] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c3j) with ESMTP id 4984225 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 15 May 2011 08:50:41 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.91.95; envelope-from=Sky2high@aol.com Received: from imo-da04.mx.aol.com (imo-da04.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.202]) by imr-db01.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p4FCo07G005850 for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 08:50:00 -0400 Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-da04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.9.) id q.e33.173bf2d7 (43973) for ; Sun, 15 May 2011 08:49:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from magic-d17.mail.aol.com (magic-d17.mail.aol.com [172.19.155.133]) by cia-dd03.mx.aol.com (v129.10) with ESMTP id MAILCIADD036-abc54dcfcbf13c8; Sun, 15 May 2011 08:49:53 -0400 From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <14054.5cb54635.3b0125f1@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 08:49:53 EDT Subject: Re: [LML] Re: N23PH Flight time X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_14054.5cb54635.3b0125f1_boundary" X-Mailer: AOL 9.6 sub 130 X-AOL-IP: 24.15.17.119 X-Spam-Flag:NO X-AOL-SENDER: Sky2high@aol.com --part1_14054.5cb54635.3b0125f1_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en Jay, et al, =20 The problem with low wing only fuel systems is that they are seldom tested= =20 before the first flight for usable fuel at different attitudes. These =20 tests are easy to perform before the wings are mounted (or even painted if= =20 using a wing spit). Depending on the pickup location, fuel available in= level =20 flight may not be the same as in a dive, climb, at a higher angle of attac= k=20 during slow flight or in an uncoordinated turn or slip, slosh chamber =20 notwithstanding. Fuel availability may be slightly different from side to= =20 side.=20 =20 Grayhawk=20 =20 =20 In a message dated 5/15/2011 7:15:41 A.M. Central Daylight Time, =20 jayph@fastairplane.net writes: =20 Lancair lists the Legacy=E2=80=99s (RG) fuel capacity at either 64 or 65= gallons=20 depending on where you look. My Legacy is marked as 66 gallons. I recentl= y=20 emptied the fuel tanks to weight the aircraft. I emptied them by=20 discconecting the output line from the gascolator and running a temp line= into fuel=20 cans. Then I used the boost pump until it sucked air. That should have le= ft=20 only unusable fuel in the system. After weighing the aircraft I had the= fuel=20 truck come out and fill me up. I took 33 gallons in each tank. Of course,= =20 since every Lancair is custom built and therefore serial number 1, the=20 capacity can very by aircraft.=20 Jay Phillips=20 L2K-254 N92SX=20 =20 =20 From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of=20 Colyn Case Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 3:14 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Re: N23PH Flight time Thanks Paul. Are those cruise numbers WOT?=20 =20 =20 Also - I'm confused about standard capacity of Legacy tanks. Is it 60= or=20 66 and how much is normally usable? =20 =20 thanks, =20 =20 Colyn =20 =20 =20 On May 13, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Paul Bricker wrote: =20 I had an IO-550 in my Lancair ES, which I ran per APS guideline. During= =20 takeoff at sea level fuel flow was ~ 30gph, and above ~3000' I would star= t=20 leaning to match takeoff EGTs during climb. This improved performance but= =20 still maintained detonation margin.This engine sucks fuel at high rpms an= d=20 rich. I used 26 gph average (reducing to 2500 rpms at 500 AGL), even when= =20 leaning during climb. =20 =20 I would go LOP when in cruise. At 8000'DA and ~ 70 deg LOP I'd see around= =20 13.5 gph, going to ~11.5 gph at 11000'.=20 =20 =20 I generated a duration spread sheet to verify fuel for long trips. Tested= =20 against actual flights I had about 3 gal more at the end of a long trip=20 then it would estimate. I'm pretty comfortable with the assumptions that= when=20 into my calculations. =20 =20 I ran my range calculations for a 60 gal usable AC, leaning during the=20 climb to 8000' LOP after that. I assumed a leisurely cruise climb to 8000= '=20 averaging 700 fpm. This gives a time to exhaustion of 4 hrs, 16 mins.=20 =20 =20 There are several factors which will radically shorten this. First, was= =20 his 60 gal usable? I found I had 4 gals unusable in my ES, but I ran each= =20 tank dry (one at a time over an airport at altitude) to determine that.= Had he=20 verified usable fuel? This alone shortens TTE to 3 hr 58 mins =20 =20 Also, if he ran ROP the fuel flow would probably be about 18 gph. TTE is= =20 now 3 hs 15 mins w/ 60 usable. At 56 usable his TTE is 3 hrs, 2 mins. =20 =20 The bottom line is his time to exhaustion is greatly influenced by how he= =20 ran his engine, and he could have easily run it dry. =20 =20 Paul Bricker =20 =20 From: Colyn Case <_colyncase@earthlink.net_=20 (mailto:colyncase@earthlink.net) > Reply-To: Lancair Mailing List <_lml@lancaironline.net_=20 (mailto:lml@lancaironline.net) > Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 12:12:47 -0400 To: <_lml@lancaironline.net_ (mailto:lml@lancaironline.net) > Subject: [LML] Re: N23PH Flight time =20 =20 =20 I don't have definitive information.=20 =20 As far as I know, never took HPAT or equivalent. =20 As far as I know, total time in last 6 months was the 5 hours engine=20 breakin time. =20 There were conflicting reports about whether the "pressure" problem was= =20 oil pressure or fuel pressure. =20 I believe he was intending to operate LOP on this trip. =20 For the APS view on engine breakin see: =20 _http://lists.kjsl.com/pipermail/beech-owners/2008-March/073658.html_=20 (http://lists.kjsl.com/pipermail/beech-owners/2008-March/073658.html)=20 =20 Anyone have LOP numbers for an IO-550 at 8000? =20 =20 Again the log records 3:17 of flight but does not include the climb (7 = =20 minutes?) =20 nor the descent ( 12 minutes? but was that power on or power off? one=20 thing very peculiar about the track log is that there is no descent.) =20 3:17 + 7 + 12 =3D 3:36 =20 If you add 3 gallons for climb and take off, the total burns come out lik= e=20 this: =20 =20 burn rate total burn =20 =20 14 53.4 =20 15 57 =20 16 60.6 =20 17 64.2 =20 =20 If he were really at 17 and knew it I think he would have done something= =20 about it. =20 I suspect there were other contributing factors. ...like faulty fuel=20 flow reporting, faulty fuel level gauging, max usable fuel less than thou= ght, =20 or maybe it really was oil pressure. =20 =20 I looked at the google earth view for the general area. I'm not sure=20 which field he landed in but they all looked smallish and maybe intimidat= ing at=20 speed. =20 It's hard to know what happened in the final moments but the wreckage=20 doesn't look consistent with forward progress once on the ground. =20 =20 =20 On May 12, 2011, at 9:26 AM, _MikeEasley@aol.com_=20 (mailto:MikeEasley@aol.com) wrote: =20 Do we know this was fuel exhaustion? I know I ran my IO-550 150+ degrees= =20 ROP throughout the break-in process. I also flew low to keep 75% power.= =20 That's at or above 15 GPH. =20 =20 I thought I read something about oil pressure. I guess we'll find out mor= e=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 testin= g for a=20 minimum of 5 hours, unless there was more work done that just an R&R. =20 =20 Losing an engine shouldn't be fatal. What do we know about the pilot and= =20 his training, time in type, etc.? Maybe Colyn can give us a bit more abo= ut=20 the pilot's experience. =20 =20 Just sorting through the scenario like I do with every Lancair accident. =20 =20 Mike Easley =20 Colorado Springs =20 =20 =20 In a message dated 5/11/2011 1:17:19 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time,=20 _edmartintx@aol.com_ (mailto:edmartintx@aol.com) writes: At high altitude, a stock Legacy with IO-550 should burn approximately 10.= 5=20 gallons/hour using "lean-of-peak" technique. In this example, actual= =20 flight time was over four hours with 21 gallons remaining (66-gallon=20 capacity). Please see: _http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N767EM_=20 (http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N767EM) =20 =20 J. E. MARTIN =20 -----Original Message----- From: Karen Farnsworth <_farnsworth@charter.net_=20 (mailto:farnsworth@charter.net) > To: lml <_lml@lancaironline.net_ (mailto:lml@lancaironline.net) > Sent: Tue, May 10, 2011 11:22 am Subject: [LML] Re: N23PH Crash=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 ____________________________________ =20 =20 From: Lancair Mailing List [_mailto:lml@lancaironline.net_=20 (mailto:lml@lancaironline.net?) ] On Behalf Of Tom McNerney Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 07:33 To: _lml@lancaironline.net_ (mailto:lml@lancaironline.net)=20 Subject: [LML] Re: N23PH Crash =20 =20 =20 =20 Flight Aware shows 3 hours 50 min, not 3 hours 15 min. That is a long wa= y=20 on 60 gallons.. =20 =20 =20 =20 Tom =20 =20 _www.N54SG.com_ (http://www.n54sg.com/) =20 =20 =20 If, as has been reported, the engine was new, I would think that it was= =20 still being broken in. This would lead me to thing that fuel flow would= be on=20 the high side; thus reducing range. =20 =20 Just a thought. =20 =20 Lynn Farnsworth --part1_14054.5cb54635.3b0125f1_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en <= FONT id=3Drole_document color=3D#000000 size=3D2 face=3DArial>
Jay, et al,
 
The problem with low wing only fuel systems is that they are seldom= tested=20 before the first flight for usable fuel at different attitudes.  Thes= e=20 tests are easy to perform before the wings are mounted (or even painted if= using=20 a wing spit).  Depending on the pickup location, fuel available in le= vel=20 flight may not be the same as in a dive, climb, at a higher angle of= attack=20 during slow flight or in an uncoordinated turn or slip, slosh chamber=20 notwithstanding.  Fuel availability may be slightly different from si= de to=20 side. 
 
Grayhawk 
 
In a message dated 5/15/2011 7:15:41 A.M. Central Daylight Time,=20 jayph@fastairplane.net writes:

Lancair=20 lists the Legacy=E2=80=99s (RG) fuel capacity at either 64 or 65 gallons= depending on=20 where you look. My Legacy is marked as 66 gallons. I recently emptied th= e fuel=20 tanks to weight the aircraft. I emptied them by discconecting the output= line=20 from the gascolator and running a temp line into fuel cans. Then I used= the=20 boost pump until it sucked air. That should have left only unusable fuel= in=20 the system. After weighing the aircraft I had the fuel truck come out an= d fill=20 me up. I took 33 gallons in each tank. Of course, since every Lancair is= =20 custom built and therefore serial number 1, the capacity can very by=20 aircraft.

 

Jay=20 Phillips

L2K-254=20 N92SX

 

From: Lancair Mailing=20 List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Colyn=20 Case
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 3:14 PM
To:=20 lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: N23PH Flight=20 time

 

Thanks Paul.  Are those cruise numbers=20 WOT?

 

Also - I'm confused about standard capacity of Lega= cy=20 tanks.   Is it 60 or 66 and how much is normally=20 usable?

 

thanks,

 

Colyn

 

On May 13, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Paul Bricker=20 wrote:



From:=20 Colyn Case <colyncase@earthlink.net>
Reply-To:=20 Lancair Mailing List <lml@lancaironline.net>
Date:=20 Fri, 13 May 2011 12:12:47 -0400
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
S= ubject:=20 [LML] Re: N23PH Flight time

Anyone=20 have LOP numbers for an IO-550 at 8000?

15    =20            57

16    =20            60.6

17    =20            64.2

         =20 At 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 remain= ing=20 (66-gallon capacity).  Please see:   http://fli= ghtaware.com/live/flight/N767EM =20

J.=20 E. MARTIN

----= -Original=20 Message-----
From: Karen Farnsworth <farnsworth@charter.net>
= To: lml=20 <lml@lancaironlin= e.net>
Sent: Tue,=20 May 10, 2011 11:22 am
Subject: [LML] Re: N23PH=20 Crash

 

 

From:= =20 Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On=20 Behalf Of Tom McNerney
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011=20 07:33
To: lml= @lancaironline.net
Subject:=20 [LML] Re: N23PH Crash

<= /DIV>

 

Flight Aware shows= 3 hours=20 50 min, not 3 hours 15 min.  That is a long way on 60=20 gallons..

 

Tom

 

If,=20 as has been reported, the engine was new, I would think that it was st= ill=20 being broken in. This would lead me to thing that fuel flow would be= on the=20 high side; thus reducing range.<= /P>

 

Just=20 a thought. 

Lynn=20 Farnsworth