Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 14:18:43 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-5718608@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=74.115.8.50; envelope-from=Tim@myrv10.com
References: <list-5718206@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-5718206@logan.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
From: Tim Olson <Tim@myrv10.com>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Question about TAS Error (and Winds Calculation) based on OAT (in a LIVP)

Could it be static error...maybe port location, or other?  Mine was off by 8=
 kts (reading low). A rework of the port to a domed one and my error is now 2=
kts low.  But, depending on your particular port issue if any, yours could b=
e reading high.
Tim


On Aug 19, 2012, at 8:36 AM, jeffrey liegner <liegner@ptd.net> wrote:

> Recall my question (same subject) about the accuracy of OAT, and its efect=
 on TAS and Winds.  SInce I rendere pireps including winds and OAT, the accu=
racy of this report is now in question.  Many have suggested reloacting the O=
AT to another place, different from the Lancair recommendation along the fus=
elage.  This is not an easy thing, putting the probe out on the wing, wiring=
 coming into and through the wing root, into the pressure vessel (different f=
rom the current OAT location).
>=20
> I performed the flight TAS calculation recommended by several.  Whether th=
ree measurements with headings 120 degrees apart, or three orthogonal headin=
gs, the results are the same.
>=20
>=20
> The Chelton presents a TAS 216 and the calculator renders TAS 205 based on=
 the n flight measurement.
>=20
> I wonder if I can change the compressibility quotient used by Chelton to a=
djust the OAT reading.
>=20
> Suggestions?
>=20
> Jeff L
> N334P
>=20
> --
> For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.htm=
l