Received-SPF: softfail
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.102.122.149; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com
Message-ID: <4277C02E.3000108@nc.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 03 May 2005 14:17:18 -0400
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Static MAP readings?
References: <list-931153@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-931153@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Russell Duffy wrote:

> I'm not sure that the absolute MAP numbers that you quoted are of any 
> value. What is important IMO is the difference between the atmospheric 
> pressure and the MAP. I am shooting for the same value for atmospheric 
> and MAP.  
>  
> You're right of course Jim.  If I were looking at tenths of an inch of 
> pressure, I would worry about the atmospheric.  I think we can safely 
> assume standard 29.92" atmospheric for the purposes of looking for 
> multiple inches of missing pressure. 
>  
> I will try to note the altimeter reading next time, and it's certainly 
> dialed into my altimeter from Sunday still, so I can even look at what 
> it was when I collected these numbers.    
>  
> Rusty
>  

Doesn't pressure go down with an increase in velocity?  Is there any way 
you could take readings with just a blower moving air through with no 
restrictions?

-- 
         ,|"|"|,                                    |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===----        Dyke Delta         |
        o|  d  |o          www.ernest.isa-geek.org  |