Almost too good to be true (pun intended).

When I had my Chelton I did the GPS quadrant to see what the 'real' numbers were, and they were off by 8kts (which is not bad, as the Velocity that I had was 25kts off, me wondering why I always had a head wind lol)

There is no free lunch, and roughly said, fuel burn determines also power, and the power needs to come from somewhere (sure we can have optimized RPM/Prop but I wonder how much this could do in reality)

So I would suggest to do the GPS track and you can use this program ( http://www.csgnetwork.com/tasgpscalc.html
to get the real numbers :)

== Ronald (n45HL, LNC4p, >160 hours)

On Aug 6, 2012, at 7:57 AM, jeffrey liegner wrote:

>
> Sent: Sunday, August 5, 2012 9:40:17 PM
> Subject: Recent LIVP Power Settings (Westbound, FL220, LOP, 2350 RPM)
>
>
> Further flight experimenting with slower prop, lower MAP and LOP at lower fuel flows.
>
>
> August 4th, Westbound FL220.
>
>
> MAP 32.0 RPM 2340 FF 16.5 gal/hour (LOP) yields TAS 246.
>
>
> In the past, at a more aggressive setting immediately after take off: MAP 34" RPM 2500 FF 19.0 though out the flight, I would show TAS ~245, roughly the same TAS. Improved prop efficiency?
>
>
> At MAP 31.5" RPM 2350, the FF is 16.2 and the performance is roughly the same.
>
>
> At this cruise setting, with a WOT RPM 2680 climb to the flight levels, the plane's range increases to six hours (rate than 5.5 hours) and still travels 1100nm in five hours on a 110gal full gas load.
>
>
> Comments welcomed.
>
>
> Jeff L
>
>
> Bonus: light winds over the Rockies
>
> http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N334P/history/20120804/1705Z/1D8/S21
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <PastedGraphic-8.jpg><PastedGraphic-7.jpg><PastedGraphic-6.jpg>--
> For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
>