Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 14:18:43 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-5718604@logan.com>
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.213.52; envelope-from=pjdmiller@gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.0 \(1485\))
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Question about TAS Error (and Winds Calculation) based on OAT (in a LIVP)
From: Paul Miller <pjdmiller@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-5718206@logan.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
References: <list-5718206@logan.com>

Jeffrey, I have one probe on the wing and another on the fuselage bottom =
near the choke point of the fuselage (Legacy).  The fuselage reads about =
8C (celsius) higher than the wing probe.  I attribute that to engine =
heat, exhaust, prop thrust and my breath.    I think the wing is the =
only logical place for temp measurement.

Paul
On 2012-08-19, at 9:36 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 accuracy of this report is now in question.  Many have suggested =
reloacting the OAT to another place, different from the Lancair =
recommendation along the fuselage.  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 from the current OAT location).
>=20
> I performed the flight TAS calculation recommended by several.  =
Whether three measurements with headings 120 degrees apart, or three =
orthogonal headings, 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 adjust the OAT reading.
>=20
> Suggestions?
>=20
> Jeff L
> N334P
>=20
> --
> For archives and unsub =
http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html