Return-Path: Received: from wb2-a.mail.utexas.edu ([128.83.126.136] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2b8) with ESMTP-TLS id 336092 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:16:34 -0400 Received-SPF: error receiver=logan.com; client-ip=128.83.126.136; envelope-from=msteitle@mail.utexas.edu Received: (qmail 4725 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2004 18:16:03 -0000 Received: from dhcp-191-101.per.utexas.edu (HELO benefits3.mail.utexas.edu) (146.6.191.101) by wb2.mail.utexas.edu with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP; 27 Jul 2004 18:16:03 -0000 Message-Id: <5.1.1.5.2.20040727130913.02610a30@localhost> X-Sender: msteitle@mail.utexas.edu@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1 Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 13:15:28 -0500 To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" From: Mark Steitle Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: EM-2 Accuracy of RPM In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_74873609==.ALT" --=====================_74873609==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed That's my thought too, but it does feel like it could be a little high (using my highly-trained tuned-ear) for the readout. What sounds like a nice rump, rump, rump, is usually indicating between 1200-1500 rpm. Its probably just be the unique "rotary sound" vs. the typical American V-8 sound. Also, the 3-rotor has a different sound than the 2-rotor. I'll guess I need to address this to Tracy. Isn't Tracy at OSH this week? Mark S. At 12:51 PM 7/27/2004 -0500, you wrote: >Has anyone actually verified the rpm readings from the >EM-2? I have no particular reason to question it, but it would be good to >know that the EM-2 readings are accurate within some factor. > >Mark S. > >Hi Mark, > >I'm assuming that you also have an EC-2. If that's the case, I'm pretty >sure the EM-2 is getting it's RPM data from the EC-2. If the EC-2 doesn't >know the exact RPM of the engine, we're all in trouble :-) > >Seriously, I never questioned it for a second, but you can call Tracy and >see if there's any way it could be wrong. >Cheers, >Rusty --=====================_74873609==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" That's my thought too, but it does feel like it could be a little high (using my highly-trained tuned-ear) for the readout.  What sounds like a nice rump, rump, rump, is usually indicating between 1200-1500 rpm.  Its probably just be the unique "rotary sound" vs. the typical American V-8 sound.  Also, the 3-rotor has a different sound than the 2-rotor.  I'll guess I need to address this to Tracy.  Isn't Tracy at OSH this week?  

Mark S.


At 12:51 PM 7/27/2004 -0500, you wrote:

Has anyone actually verified the rpm readings from the
EM-2?  I have no particular reason to question it, but it would be good to
know that the EM-2 readings are accurate within some factor.

Mark S.

Hi Mark,

I'm assuming that you also have an EC-2.  If that's the case, I'm pretty sure the EM-2 is getting it's RPM data from the EC-2.  If the EC-2 doesn't know the exact RPM of the engine, we're all in trouble :-)  

Seriously, I never questioned it for a second, but you can call Tracy and see if there's any way it could be wrong. 
Cheers,
Rusty
--=====================_74873609==.ALT--