Return-Path: Received: from ms-smtp-01.southeast.rr.com ([24.93.67.82] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.3) with ESMTP id 2577146 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 12 Sep 2003 11:50:38 -0400 Received: from o7y6b5 (clt78-020.carolina.rr.com [24.93.78.20]) by ms-smtp-01.southeast.rr.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with SMTP id h8CFhL0R028060; Fri, 12 Sep 2003 11:43:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <001c01c37942$43668320$1702a8c0@WorkGroup> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Cc: "Tracy Crook" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbos & EM2 Survey Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 11:26:39 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0019_01C37920.BBF955A0" 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 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C37920.BBF955A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MessageHi Tracy, Since my panel is already built I would opt for the smaller format. = Too bad the cut out isn't 3.03 x 1.54 then it would fit neatly in the = place of my unused Terra Nav/VOR set {:>). Ed Anderson ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Tracy Crook=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 11:41 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbos & EM2 Survey Really good discussion of 'real world' factors on aircraft = turbocharging for the past few days. =20 Rusty's brief comment about fuel burn on boost is especially relevant. = I get frequent inquiries about reliability when running 'conservative' = manifold pressures of 30 - 40" Hg at cruise. The engine would probably = tollerate this but the ignored factor is fuel burn. A standard RV-3 = (with the original internal fuel tank) would have less than 1 hour = endurance when running at 40" MAP. At max power my RV-4 only has a 1.5 = hour endurance at sea level (30" MAP) and I don't have a turbo!. =20 This is not an argument against turbos, in fact I may soon have 'turbo = envy' when these guys get them operational. There are reasons why a = turbo can be a good thing, just be sure you know what they are. But the real reason for this post is to get an idea of what size EM2 = display would have the highest demand. I'm ordering the parts for the = first production batch next week and software development is 99% = complete. =20 The EM2 will be available in two different sizes but both have all the = same other features. The large format has a panel cutout width the same = size as a standard radio stack (6.2") with mounting flange out to 6.5". = Total heigth is 2.875" with a cutout heigth of 2.5". There are a lot of planes already out there with very little panel = space left so the smaller version would suit them better. The EM2-S = measures 4.7" wide x 2.55" tall with a panel cutout window of about 3.5" = x 2".The price for the smaller format is slightly lower but not enough = to make that a big factor. So, the question is, which would most pilots want? Any answer or = guess is welcome. =20 Thanks to all for the encouragement (& patience!) on this project. Tracy PS: For an example of what took so long, I just spent a week programming = & optimizing the damping factor for altimeter & VSI functions. Stuff = like this didn't even occure to me when I started. I saw the need when = static port pressure burbles due to turbulent airflow, wind gusts, etc = would send these readings all over the place. ------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C37920.BBF955A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Hi Tracy,
 
    Since my panel is = already built=20 I would opt for the smaller format.  Too bad the cut out isn't 3.03 = x 1.54=20 then it would fit neatly in the place of my unused Terra Nav/VOR set=20 {:>).
 
Ed Anderson
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Tracy = Crook
Sent: Friday, September 12, = 2003 11:41=20 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbos = & EM2=20 Survey

Really good discussion of 'real = world' factors on=20 aircraft turbocharging for the past few days.   =
 
Rusty's brief comment about fuel burn = on boost is=20 especially relevant.  I get frequent inquiries about reliability = when=20 running 'conservative' manifold pressures of 30 - 40" Hg at=20 cruise.   The engine would probably tollerate this = but the=20 ignored factor is fuel burn.  A standard RV-3 (with the original = internal=20 fuel tank) would have less than 1 hour endurance when running at = 40"=20 MAP.  At max power my RV-4  only has a 1.5 = hour=20 endurance at sea level (30" MAP) and I don't have a=20 turbo!.   
 
This is not an argument against = turbos, in fact I=20 may soon have 'turbo envy'  when these guys get them=20 operational. There are reasons why a turbo can be a good thing, = just be=20 sure you know what they are.
 
But the real reason for this post is = to get an=20 idea of what size EM2 display would have the highest = demand.  I'm=20 ordering the parts for the first production batch next week and = software=20 development is 99% complete.  
 
The EM2 will be available in two = different sizes=20 but both have all the same other features.  The large format has=20 a panel cutout width the same size as a standard radio = stack =20 (6.2") with mounting flange out to 6.5".   Total heigth is=20 2.875"  with a cutout heigth of 2.5".
 
There are a lot of planes already out = there with=20 very little panel space left so the smaller version would suit them=20 better.  The EM2-S measures 4.7" wide x 2.55" tall with a panel = cutout=20 window of about 3.5" x 2".The price for the smaller format is slightly = lower=20 but not enough to make that a big factor.
 
So, the question is, which would most = pilots=20 want?  Any answer or guess is welcome. 
 
Thanks to all for the encouragement = (&=20 patience!) on this project.
 
Tracy
 
PS:
For an example of  what took so = long, I just=20 spent a week programming & optimizing the damping factor = for=20 altimeter & VSI functions.  Stuff like this didn't even = occure to me=20 when I started.  I saw the need when static port pressure burbles = due to=20 turbulent airflow, wind gusts, etc would send these readings all over = the=20 place. 
------=_NextPart_000_0019_01C37920.BBF955A0--