X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [64.4.51.84] (HELO hotmail.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0) with ESMTP id 812346 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 02 Nov 2005 16:17:39 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.4.51.84; envelope-from=lors01@msn.com Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 2 Nov 2005 13:16:51 -0800 Message-ID: Received: from 4.174.1.21 by BAY107-DAV12.phx.gbl with DAV; Wed, 02 Nov 2005 21:16:51 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [4.174.1.21] X-Originating-Email: [lors01@msn.com] X-Sender: lors01@msn.com From: "Tracy Crook" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Shady Bend / economy test Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 16:15:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0348_01C5DFC8.9A5BD510" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: MSN 9 X-MimeOLE: Produced By MSN MimeOLE V9.10.0011.1703 Seal-Send-Time: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 16:15:12 -0500 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Nov 2005 21:16:51.0892 (UTC) FILETIME=[BE5F3F40:01C5DFF2] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0348_01C5DFC8.9A5BD510 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Glad to hear that everyone had a good time, Laura & I were honored that = you all came that far to be here. Already looking forward to next year! Just have to comment on some test results that seem to be a "free lunch" = in the fuel economy area. Some of you may recall that I see only a = small reduction in fuel burn on the Renesis compared to the earlier 13B. = The biggest change is at low throttle, like at idle and taxi power = settings where it really does not matter much (usually). =20 Yesterday on a mental health flight, I was slowly descending at a power = setting too low to maintain level flight (about 3100 rpm burning about = 1.5 GPH) and was grinning at the MPG readout on the EM2 which was = showing about 55 MPG. The best I can manage in level flight is around = 30 MPG. VSI was showing 200 FPM down so it took 5 minutes to descend = 1000 ft. I started thinking about the time it took to climb 1000 ft and = wondered about what the MPG was in climb since I don't usually pay much = attention to that. I setup a moderate climb power setting but instead = of setting up best power mixture I set it fairly lean to minimize fuel = burn instead of maximizing climb rate. At 9.5 GPH and 100 MPH I was = climbing at 1500 fpm and getting 10.5 MPG. It took 40 seconds to climb = 1000 feet. Hmmm, I thought, what is the average MPG if I get 10.5 MPG = for 40 seconds and 55 MPG for the next 5 minutes? I think the answer = is around 48 MPG but that seems to be too good to be true. Seems like = some one would have used this technique long ago if it would give a 60% = increase in fuel economy. The error in the EM2 fuel flow readout may be = higher at this low flow but nothing like 60%. Any math majors out there = see a flaw in my math or logic? Or maybe I was in a giant thermal at = the time? I repeated the test twice so I don't think so. The only down side is that I had to fly relatively slow to get these = results (95 - 100 mph) but a 60% increase in fuel economy sure could be = handy in some situations. This test was at 1000 - 2000 feet so I'll = have to see if it holds true at higher altitudes. Tracy ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Charlie England=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 10:26 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Shady Bend As always, it was 'worth the drive'. Had an enjoyable trip down with=20 Kelly, Monty & Ken on Thursday. As you can tell by seeing Bill's=20 photos, the tour of Finn's 'incident site' was terrifying. The rest of = the weekend was much more pleasant. All the forums were informative,=20 from Tracy de-mystifying engine controller programming to Monty = starting=20 a research program into quieting the rotary's exhaust. In my=20 not-so-humble opinion, this could be a pivotal factor in the = widespread=20 acceptance of the rotary. The highlight of the weekend for me was my ride in Tracy's rotary = RV-4.=20 Acceleration & climb were obviously more impressive than my Lyc = powered=20 -4, but the exciting thing for me was seeing a low altitude (~1500ft)=20 cruise power setting yielding 190-195 mph true airspeed burning = between=20 8.5 & 9 gph. My goal for my RV-7 project is minimum 200 mph cruise at=20 max 10 gph. I've been a huge fan of the rotary since my dad's purchase = of a new '74 model RX-4, but I've had serious misgivings about whether = the rotary could achieve that fuel burn/speed combination due to = numbers=20 quoted by others already flying. Tracy's plane proves those numbers = are=20 achievable. Now, Mike Magee needs to get back to work on that aluminum = accessory cover that will bolt up to a standard Lyc mount. (Are you=20 listening, Mike?) Even though Mistral seems to be making their parts=20 available, I really can't afford the exchange rate & 'certified' = prices. The more I see of the Renesis, the more pleased I become that I'm=20 running so far behind everyone else. :-) By the time I'm ready for an=20 engine, it will be almost as cheap as a 2nd/3rd gen engine & *much*=20 easier to convert for aviation use. No water pump mods needed, dirt=20 simple & compact intake & exhaust manifolds, easier to tame exhaust=20 pulses, equal or superior horsepower, available used without being = 'used=20 up', etc, etc. Anyone who is installing or planning a rotary installation can't help=20 gaining invaluable knowledge while attending these events. Beyond = that,=20 you just can't beat the great people you meet & form friendships with. My heartfelt thanks to Tracy for sharing his wealth of knowledge & to=20 Laura for making these events possible. I can't wait to see you guys = at=20 Bill & Linda's in February. Charlie -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: = http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/ ------=_NextPart_000_0348_01C5DFC8.9A5BD510 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Glad to hear that everyone had a good time, Laura & I were = honored that=20 you all came that far to be here.  Already looking forward to next=20 year!
 
Just have to comment on some test results that seem to be a = "free=20 lunch" in the fuel economy area.   Some of you may recall that = I see=20 only a small reduction in fuel burn on the Renesis compared to the = earlier=20 13B.  The biggest change is at low throttle, like at idle and taxi = power=20 settings where it really does not matter much (usually). 
 
Yesterday on a mental health flight, I was slowly descending = at a=20 power setting too low to maintain level flight (about 3100 rpm burning = about 1.5=20 GPH) and was grinning at the MPG readout on the EM2 which was showing = about 55=20 MPG.  The best I can manage in level flight is around 30=20 MPG.  VSI was showing 200 FPM down so it took 5 minutes to descend = 1000=20 ft.  I started thinking about the time it took to climb 1000 ft and = wondered about what the MPG was in climb since I don't usually pay much=20 attention to that.  I setup a moderate climb power setting but = instead of=20 setting up best power mixture I set it fairly lean to minimize fuel burn = instead=20 of maximizing climb rate.  At 9.5 GPH and 100 MPH I was = climbing at=20 1500 fpm and getting 10.5 MPG.  It took 40 seconds to climb 1000=20 feet.   Hmmm, I thought,  what is the average MPG if = I get=20 10.5 MPG for 40 seconds and 55 MPG for the next 5 minutes?   I = think=20 the answer is around 48 MPG but that seems to be too good to be = true. =20 Seems like some one would have used this technique long ago if it would = give a=20 60% increase in fuel economy.  The error in the EM2 fuel flow = readout may=20 be higher at this low flow but nothing like 60%.  Any math majors = out there=20 see a flaw in my math or logic?   Or maybe I was in a giant = thermal at=20 the time?  I repeated the test twice so I don't think so.
 
The only down side is that I had to fly relatively slow to get = these=20 results (95 - 100 mph) but a 60% increase in fuel economy sure = could=20 be handy in some situations.   This test was at 1000 - 2000 = feet so=20 I'll have to see if it holds true at higher altitudes.
 
Tracy
----- Original Message -----
From: Charlie England
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 = 10:26=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Shady = Bend

As always, it was 'worth the drive'. Had an enjoyable = trip down=20 with
Kelly, Monty & Ken on Thursday.  As you can tell by = seeing=20 Bill's
photos, the tour of Finn's 'incident site' was terrifying. = The rest=20 of
the weekend was much more pleasant. All the forums were = informative,=20
from Tracy de-mystifying engine controller programming to Monty = starting=20
a research program into quieting the rotary's exhaust. In my=20
not-so-humble opinion, this could be a pivotal factor in the = widespread=20
acceptance of the rotary.

The highlight of the weekend for = me was=20 my ride in Tracy's rotary RV-4.
Acceleration & climb were = obviously=20 more impressive than my Lyc powered
-4, but the exciting thing for = me was=20 seeing a low altitude (~1500ft)
cruise power setting yielding = 190-195 mph=20 true airspeed burning between
8.5 & 9 gph. My goal for my RV-7 = project=20 is minimum 200 mph cruise at
max 10 gph. I've been a huge fan of = the=20 rotary since my dad's purchase
of a new '74 model RX-4, but I've = had=20 serious misgivings about whether
the rotary could achieve that = fuel=20 burn/speed combination due to numbers
quoted by others already = flying.=20 Tracy's plane proves those numbers are
achievable. Now, Mike Magee = needs=20 to get back to work on that aluminum
accessory cover that will = bolt up to=20 a standard Lyc mount. (Are you
listening, Mike?) Even though = Mistral seems=20 to be making their parts
available, I really can't afford the = exchange=20 rate & 'certified' prices.

The more I see of the Renesis, = the more=20 pleased I become that I'm
running so far behind everyone else. :-) = By the=20 time I'm ready for an
engine, it will be almost as cheap as a = 2nd/3rd gen=20 engine & *much*
easier to convert for aviation use. No water = pump mods=20 needed, dirt
simple & compact intake & exhaust manifolds, = easier=20 to tame exhaust
pulses, equal or superior horsepower, available = used=20 without being 'used
up', etc, etc.

Anyone who is installing = or=20 planning a rotary installation can't help
gaining invaluable = knowledge=20 while attending these events. Beyond that,
you just can't beat the = great=20 people you meet & form friendships with.

My heartfelt = thanks to=20 Tracy for sharing his wealth of knowledge & to
Laura for = making these=20 events possible. I can't wait to see you guys at
Bill & = Linda's in=20 February.

Charlie





--
Homepage:  = http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archi= ve and=20 UnSub:   http://mail.lanca= ironline.net/lists/flyrotary/
------=_NextPart_000_0348_01C5DFC8.9A5BD510--