Return-Path: Received: from [161.88.255.139] (account marv@lancaironline.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 4.2) with HTTP id 376672 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:22:50 -0400 From: "Marvin Kaye" Subject: Re: ES What are the Real Numbers? To: lml X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser Interface v.4.2 Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:22:50 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <082420041637.7576.412B6ECB0000746200001D982200761438050E079C019D0A@comcast.net> References: <082420041637.7576.412B6ECB0000746200001D982200761438050E079C019D0A@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Posted for erosiak@comcast.net: Bryan, According to the Continental 'TSIO-550-E Sea Level Constant Speed Curve' as published in one of Lancair's old newsletters, you are setting your engine at slightly under 60% power. I use somewhat similar settings. I have found for my engine prop setup (same as yours) that 29" and 2450 RPM work well for a smooth running engine. I allow the turbo's to operate up to but never over 1600 TIT, and use fuel to keep them there. I see 20-21 gallons dependent upon the temperature. I use 31" and 2500 RPM, full rich (75%) for cruise climb and see around 1000 FPM at 140 KIAS (estimate 3100 pounds) . Again on a very hot day it will be lower as I climb at 150 KIAS to insure the engine stays within the normal operating specs (I have never had a problem, I am just conservative). I have consistantly seen 220 KTAS at 75% at 12,500 and up (Peter Stiles will back this up). I don't typically fly above 14,500 unless there is a good reason to do so (Lake Tahoe 6240' and the mountains here in California and Oregon are the reason for my engine selection). Send me an email off list if you don't have a copy of the graph mentioned earlier and I will send you a copy. Regards, Ed Rosiak Super ES PS.. Tim O., I won't be at the picnic, but we can talk about flying my airplane at altitude to determine real time speeds............