|
RV-4 with 13 BREW/NA, turbo rotors- 9.1/1, four port, running ~8 gph. Static timing is right where it should be, I don't recall the advance at the moment. Slower than other RV-4s at this time, but not too worried about speed at this juncture- just enjoying the trouble free flying after 15 years of building. I'll worry about refinements during our long, grey, raining winter.
Brian Trubee
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Steitle <msteitle@gmail.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Mon, Jul 9, 2012 11:12 am
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: On the step
Brian,
What's your fuel burn at 140-150 mph? How long are your intake
runners? I assume you've checked and verified your static timing?
What airframe is this? How does your performance compare to other a/c
of the same make/model, but running certified engines? As Lynn H. has
stressed many times before... the devil's in the details.
Mark S.
On 7/9/12, bktrub@aol.com <bktrub@aol.com> wrote:
>
> I commented on here recently about how I took a cross- country flight to
> Walla Walla from Everett, Wa recently and was only seeing 140-150 mph cruise
> at 11,500 feet. It got me to thinking- I was getting about 6200 rpm on the
> engine which is 2175 at the prop. So, I'm a little overpropped/
> underpowered.
>
> So, there's the old chestnut about how you can get a few more knots from an
> airplane in cruise if you go a little above your cruise altitude and then
> descend to your cruise altitude, thereby getting "on the step" . Some pilots
> swear by this, others dismiss it. I have a theory- if I climb to a cruise
> altitude and stay at full throttle while doing so, I will only get the
> engine to run up to a certain RPM and therefore a certain hp will be
> achieved, and no more and so the airplane will settle into an equilibrium at
> a certain speed- say at whatever hp/speed - 140 mph at 6200 rpm- lt's say x
> hp.
>
> Now, If I were to descend to my cruise altitude in a shallow dive, I will be
> acheiving a higher rpm and hence horsepower, say 6800 rpm and horsepower
> will be x + 9%x for a hp of 109% of the hp achieved at 6200 rpm, so I should
> be able to achieve and maintain a higher cruise speed if I descend to my
> cruising altitude. ( I picked 9% arbitrarily for the sake of argument) .
>
> Anyone want to shoot me down on this one?
>
> This is just an theory, If I want to go faster first I have to clean up my
> drag. My cooling scoop is effective, but obviously draggy. And It needs a
> flap on it. That's a project for this winter.
>
> Brian Trubee
>
--
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
|
|