Return-Path: Sender: "Marvin Kaye" To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:58:19 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mta-out-1.udlp.com ([207.109.1.8] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.5) with ESMTP id 572117 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 11:41:45 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=207.109.1.8; envelope-from=Christopher.Zavatson@udlp.com Received: from asdmngwia.mpls.udlp.com (asdmngwia.mpls.udlp.com [10.1.62.22]) by mta-out-1.udlp.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iBIEgTu2019283 for ; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:42:29 -0600 Received: from DM-MN-06-MTA by asdmngwia.mpls.udlp.com with Novell_GroupWise; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:41:06 -0600 X-Original-Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 6.0.2 X-Original-Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:40:54 -0600 From: "Christopher Zavatson" X-Original-To: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: LNC2 Forward Facing Induction Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Scott, Here is another factor to throw into the mix: Calibration of the MP gauge. A gauge that is off even a little can make one system look a lot better or worse than another. I own two different MP gauges that did not agree with each other. Using annually calibrated test equipment, I determined that one was right on and the other was way off.(both were new, so much for assuming new=calibrated) A gauge of unknown calibration can still do a good job showing the before and after comparison of an aircraft mod. I just wouldn't put too much faith in the absolute numbers. A small discrepancy in the MP reading could easily be misinterpreted as a large loss of dynamic pressure recovery. So many details..... Chris Zavatson N91CZ 360std, 900hrs