Return-Path: Received: from [24.25.9.101] (HELO ms-smtp-02-eri0.southeast.rr.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.5) with ESMTP id 493637 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:28:30 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.101; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-069-132-109-019.carolina.rr.com [69.132.109.19]) by ms-smtp-02-eri0.southeast.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with SMTP id iA13Rw4S004183 for ; Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:27:59 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <002501c4bfc2$d1156f20$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Can happen to us all was Phase one complete, official climb results disappointing Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:28:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0022_01C4BF98.E80AE9A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0022_01C4BF98.E80AE9A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MessageHey Rusty, Did I ever tell you about the time I put a new intake manifold on my = aircraft and went out and topped 200 MPH (couple of years ago). Well = after announcing it on the other list, I got to looking over my data and = found I had failed to convert the OAT from Fahrenheit to Celsius as = required by the equation I was using. When I did - I lost about 12 MPH = {:<(. and had to announce that I had not made 200 MPH. I have also found that conditions/factors can team up to be exactly = right at one time and less so at another. For instance when I went out = one time this week in my aborted attempted to reach Lake City I fired up = my engine and after letting it warm up I went to WOT. I know the tach = hit 6000 rpm (at least above the 5900 mark) with the new prop and = gearbox. Wow! was I elated. But, subsequent runs couldn't get it above = 5700 rpm (not bad but not 6000) {:>). I think the compression is a bit = better before the engine gets too warm and then it drops and so does = static, but who really knows. I am waiting for the weather to get just = a bit cooler and I think I'll hit 6000 rpm static repeatedly. I find your data very interesting. While I still need to do more = testing, my best ROC with the new combination still appears to be 120 = MPH IAS. I consistently get 1600-1800 FPM now and have even pegged the = VSI at 2000 fpm on one occasion. I attempted one time to use a slower = airspeed but it seemed to load the engine and my ROC decreased. But, = these are preliminary data. Still all said and done, I don't think 2000+ FPM is topped by many RVs = no matter what the claims are. Here are a couple of examples from the = CAFE tests - bout as good as it gets. RV-6A 180 HP 70x74 1238 FPM RV-4 ? HP CS 3308 FPM Dave Anders' 250 MPH RV-4 (couldn't find = a report on a more typical RV-4) Rv-8 =20 200HP CS 2176 FPM So from what you have shown so far I say you are in excellent company - = Keep it up. Ed Anderson ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Russell Duffy=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 7:09 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Phase one complete, official climb results = disappointing Greetings, Posted below are the details of today's final phase one flight. I'm = truly at a loss to explain how I saw 3000 fpm yesterday, because I sure = couldn't do it today. I know I've seen 2500+ on a couple of occasions = before, but not today. Sorry to get everyone (particularly myself) = overly excited about the climb rate. I'm still not sure how I'm getting = 500 fpm less than Tracy, while running the same prop, and rpm. Oh well, = the testing will never really end, which is what keeps it all = interesting. =20 Cheers, Rusty (grilling steak, and drinking beer now) 10-31-04 1.9 hours / 40.0 total =20 I finished up the climb testing, and did some descent testing. = Unfortunately, I must have been seeing things yesterday when I though I = saw 3000 rpm. Either that, or it was a bit of an extended zoom climb. = The real figure is 2222 fpm, which is almost depressing, but it was 85 = degrees, and I have full fuel, so I'm sure I can improve this with = better conditions. The goal is still 3000 fpm, but I'm wondering if = I'll make it now. =20 =20 The main climb test was done at 4000 ft. I started at 3500, then = established a climb at the designated speed. Once it was stabilized, = and I passed through 4000 ft, I recorded the reading from the VSI. This = was just to get an idea of the best ROC, without regard to the actual = figure. =20 =20 Climb testing : mph / fps climb 90 / 2100 100 / 2200 110 / 2000 120 / 1900 130 / 1700 140 / 1400 =20 Since 100 mph was the best, I dropped to 1500 feet, established 100 = mph at full throttle climb, and timed how long it took to get from 2000 = to 3000 feet. The average of a few runs was 27 seconds, which = calculates to 2222 fpm. If nothing else, it shows that my VSI is pretty = accurate. =20 =20 I also did some descent rate testing around 3000 feet. Basically, I = went to idle, and noted the VSI descent rate at the following speeds. =20 Mph / fps descent=20 80 / 700 90 / 900 100 / 1100 =20 I had added a trim tab to the (new) rudder, and found that it wasn't = quite enough. It's amazing the power it has though. In high power = cruise, I still need a little right rudder (added more trim after the = flight), but in descent testing, I had to add a bunch of left rudder to = counteract the trim tab. =20 =20 I also tried to un-squeeze the trailing edge of the new left aileron, = to try to correct a little left rolling motion that was aggravated when = I replaced the aileron. It may have been a little better, but it still = took some trim. After the flight, I gently squeezed the right aileron a = little, so we'll see if that helps more. =20 =20 Finally, this concludes the phase one testing. I had to circle around = the area for the last couple tenths to be legal, but it's done. The = airframe itself has behaved just as any RV should, and since I did = fairly through airframe testing on my previous RV-8, I was able to get = through the testing of this plane fairly quickly. Just gotta love = Van's RV's :-)=20 =20 Now that the official time is over, I plan to pull the cowl, and do = some work on the oil temp scoop. I'm also going to vastly improve the = TB air inlet that's in the right radiator duct. =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0022_01C4BF98.E80AE9A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Hey Rusty,
 
    Did I ever tell you = about the=20 time I put a new intake manifold on my aircraft and went out and topped = 200 MPH=20 (couple of years ago).  Well after announcing it on the other list, = I got=20 to looking over my data and found I had failed to convert the OAT from=20 Fahrenheit to Celsius as required by the equation I was using.  = When I did=20 - I lost about 12 MPH {:<(. and had to announce that I had not = made 200=20 MPH.
 
I have also found that = conditions/factors  can=20 team up to be exactly right at one time and less so at another.  = For=20 instance when I went out one time this week in my aborted attempted to = reach=20 Lake City I fired up my engine and after letting it warm up I went to = WOT. =20 I know the tach hit 6000 rpm (at least above the 5900 mark) with the new = prop=20 and gearbox. Wow! was I elated.  But, subsequent runs couldn't get = it above=20 5700 rpm (not bad but not 6000) {:>).  I think the compression = is a bit=20 better before the engine gets too warm and then it drops and so does = static, but=20 who really knows.  I am waiting for the weather to get just a bit = cooler=20 and I think I'll hit 6000 rpm static repeatedly.
 
I find your data very = interesting.  While I=20 still need to do more testing, my best ROC with the new combination = still=20 appears to be 120 MPH IAS.  I consistently get 1600-1800 FPM now = and have=20 even pegged the VSI at 2000 fpm on one occasion.  I attempted one = time to=20 use a slower airspeed but it seemed to load the engine and my ROC=20 decreased.  But, these are preliminary data.
 
Still all said and done, I don't think = 2000+ FPM is=20 topped by many RVs no matter what the claims are.  Here are a = couple of=20 examples from the CAFE tests - bout as good as it gets.
 
RV-6A
   180 HP = 70x74    1238=20 FPM
RV-4
   ? =20 HP   CS        &nb= sp;=20 3308 FPM Dave Anders' 250 MPH RV-4 (couldn't find a report on a more = typical=20 RV-4)
Rv-8          =             <= /FONT>
   200HP=20 CS          2176 = FPM
 
So from what you have shown so far I = say you are in=20 excellent company - Keep it up.
 
Ed Anderson
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Russell=20 Duffy
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 = 7:09=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Phase one = complete,=20 official climb results disappointing

Greetings,
 
Posted below = are the=20 details of today's final phase one flight.  I'm truly at a loss = to=20 explain how I saw 3000 fpm yesterday, because I sure couldn't do it=20 today.  I know I've seen 2500+ on a couple of occasions before, = but not=20 today.  Sorry to get everyone (particularly myself) overly = excited about=20 the climb rate.  I'm still not sure how I'm getting 500 fpm less = than=20 Tracy, while running the same prop, and rpm.  Oh well, the = testing will=20 never really end, which is what keeps it all interesting. =20
 
Cheers,
Rusty = (grilling steak,=20 and drinking beer now)
 
 
 
 

10-31-04  1.9 hours  /  40.0 total

 

I = finished up the=20 climb testing, and did some descent testing.  Unfortunately, I must have = been seeing=20 things yesterday when I though I saw 3000 rpm.  Either that, or it was a bit = of an=20 extended zoom climb.  = The real=20 figure is 2222 fpm, which is almost depressing, but it was 85 degrees, = and I=20 have full fuel, so I=92m sure I can improve this with better = conditions.  The goal is still 3000 fpm, = but I=92m=20 wondering if I=92ll make it now. =20

 

The = main climb=20 test was done at 4000 ft.  = I=20 started at 3500, then established a climb at the designated = speed.  Once it was stabilized, and = I passed=20 through 4000 ft, I recorded the reading from the VSI.  This was just to get an idea = of the=20 best ROC, without regard to the actual figure. 

 

Climb testing=20 :  mph  /  fps climb

  90  /  2100

100  /  2200

110  /  2000

120  /  1900

130  /  1700

140  /  1400

 

Since 100 mph was=20 the best, I dropped to 1500 feet, established 100 mph at full throttle = climb,=20 and timed how long it took to get from 2000 to 3000 feet.  The average of a few runs = was 27=20 seconds, which calculates to 2222 fpm. =20 If nothing else, it shows that my VSI is pretty accurate. 

 

I = also did some=20 descent rate testing around 3000 feet. =20 Basically, I went to idle, and noted the VSI descent rate at = the=20 following speeds.

 

Mph  /  fps descent

  80  /  700

  90  /  900

100  /  1100

 

I = had added a trim=20 tab to the (new) rudder, and found that it wasn=92t quite enough.  It=92s amazing the power it = has=20 though.  In high power = cruise, I=20 still need a little right rudder (added more trim after the flight), = but in=20 descent testing, I had to add a bunch of left rudder to counteract the = trim=20 tab. 

 

I = also tried to=20 un-squeeze the trailing edge of the new left aileron, to try to = correct a=20 little left rolling motion that was aggravated when I replaced the=20 aileron.  It may have = been a=20 little better, but it still took some trim.  After the flight, I gently = squeezed=20 the right aileron a little, so we=92ll see if that helps more. 

 

Finally, this=20 concludes the phase one testing.  I had to circle around the = area for the=20 last couple tenths to be legal, but it=92s done.   The airframe itself has = behaved just as=20 any RV should, and since I did fairly through airframe testing on my = previous=20 RV-8, I was able to get through the testing of this plane fairly = quickly.    Just gotta love Van=92s = RV=92s :-)=20

 

Now = that the=20 official time is over, I plan to pull the cowl, and do some work on = the oil=20 temp scoop.  I=92m also = going to=20 vastly improve the TB air inlet that=92s in the right radiator = duct. =20

------=_NextPart_000_0022_01C4BF98.E80AE9A0--