Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.148.227.154; envelope-from=rlwhite@comcast.net
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 11:07:25 -0700
From: Bob White <rlwhite@comcast.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Cool Tube Muffler Sound Readings
Message-Id: <20060112110725.d3d5d3af.rlwhite@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <list-923995@logan.com>
References: <list-923995@logan.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 12:52:13 -0500
Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com> wrote:

> Bob White wrote:
> 
> >That does raise an interesting question though.  At what rpm should I
> >run a Lycoming to compare to the rotary at 3000?  For the same prop
> >speed, it should be a little over 1000.  It seems that WOT static should
> >be a fair comparison point for both engines.  Then how much does the
> >prop affect the results?
> >
> >Bob W.
> >
> How different does you car's engine sound with WOT on the highway vs 
> lugging from a stop uphill? 
> The truest comparison would be the same prop RPM at the same engine HP, 
> wouldn't it?  Use the same prop on both engines and measure at the same 
> prop RPM?
> 
Hi Ernest,

That sound like a good comparison, except that I won't ever see this
prop on another plane.  It's one of a kind.  The WOT static test would
be about right for noise on the airport at the start of the take-off
roll.  I guess after that it's just a matter of whether I'm happy with
the noise level in the cockpit.

Bob W.

-- 
http://www.bob-white.com
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 (first engine start 1/7/06)
Custom Cables for your rotary installation -
http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/