X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:47:40 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail-qa0-f43.google.com ([209.85.216.43] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTPS id 6024324 for lml@lancaironline.net; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:45:35 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.216.43; envelope-from=joeczabaranek@gmail.com Received: by mail-qa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id cr7so66401qab.16 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 12:45:00 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.49.96.33 with SMTP id dp1mr28755733qeb.60.1358887500828; Tue, 22 Jan 2013 12:45:00 -0800 (PST) X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [10.176.131.80] (99.sub-70-199-107.myvzw.com. [70.199.107.99]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id jy4sm11519658qeb.12.2013.01.22.12.44.58 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 22 Jan 2013 12:45:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [LML] Re: the Legacy RG Static ports References: From: Joseph Czabaranek Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-D62F2AD3-5C0B-49EC-9648-E96C5916525E X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10A551) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Message-Id: <23AF9F30-18E7-4A10-83C9-BB1718E50561@gmail.com> X-Original-Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:44:56 -0500 X-Original-To: "lml@lancaironline.net" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) --Apple-Mail-D62F2AD3-5C0B-49EC-9648-E96C5916525E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My point was not very clear in that last post. If your airspeed is indicati= ng incorrect, could modifying the static port to fix the airspeed problem j= ust be masking a problem with something else at the expense of a correct alt= imeter? Joe Czabaranek On Jan 22, 2013, at 3:25 PM, Joseph Czabaranek wro= te: > I havent bothered to check indicated airspeed or my altimeter in my 360. M= y static ports are flush. They look like someone drilled a .010" hole throu= gh the paint/clear coat. =20 >=20 > Before you all added elevation to your static ports did you bother to chec= k the altimeter? At 1000' MSL on a standard day, a .02" error in your stati= c line would give a 20' baro altitude error AND a 1.5 KIAS error (at about 1= 50 KIAS), IF your pitot line was measuring total pressure correctly. An ind= icated airspeed error could be more than just your static port ... >=20 > A low pass at tower level to +/- 20' might be more accurate than trying to= fly multiple legs of a course and measuring your KIAS to +/- 1.5 kts >=20 >=20 > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Dennis Johnson w= rote: >> I have a Legacy RG and put my static ports flush with the outer skin, loc= ated in accordance with the assembly manual. During my flight test phase, I= pleasantly noticed that I always had a tailwind! I knew I was lucky to be f= lying such a wonderful airplane and just figured I was equally lucky to alwa= ys have a tailwind. >>=20 >> Eventually, logic prevailed and I realized nobody could be that lucky. I= flew the four course GPS airspeed check and discovered that my indicated ai= rspeed was reading low. I added a tiny piece of machined aluminum, similar t= o a domed head rivet, to both static ports and it solved the problem. Other= Legacy builders who installed their static ports protruding slightly tell m= e that their indicated airspeed is accurate. >>=20 >> Dennis >> Legacy 580 hours=20 >>=20 >> -- >> For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.ht= ml >=20 --Apple-Mail-D62F2AD3-5C0B-49EC-9648-E96C5916525E Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
My point was not very clear in that last post.  If your airspeed is indicating incorrect,  could modifying the static port to fix the airspeed problem just be masking a problem with something else at the expense of a correct altimeter?

Joe Czabaranek

On Jan 22, 2013, at 3:25 PM, Joseph Czabaranek <joeczabaranek@gmail.com> wrote:

I havent bothered to check indicated airspeed or my altimeter in my 360.  My static ports are flush.  They look like someone drilled a .010" hole through the paint/clear coat.  

Before you all added elevation to your static ports did you bother to check the altimeter?  At 1000' MSL on a standard day, a .02" error in your static line would give a 20' baro altitude error  AND a 1.5 KIAS error (at about 150 KIAS), IF your pitot line was measuring total pressure correctly.  An indicated airspeed error could be more than just your static port ...

A low pass at tower level to +/- 20' might be more accurate than trying to fly multiple legs of a course and measuring your KIAS to +/- 1.5 kts


On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Dennis Johnson <pinetownd@volcano.net> wrote:
I have a Legacy RG and put my static ports flush with the outer skin, located in accordance with the assembly manual.  During my flight test phase, I pleasantly noticed that I always had a tailwind!  I knew I was lucky to be flying such a wonderful airplane and just figured I was equally lucky to always have a tailwind.

Eventually, logic prevailed and I realized nobody could be that lucky.  I flew the four course GPS airspeed check and discovered that my indicated airspeed was reading low.  I added a tiny piece of machined aluminum, similar to a domed head rivet, to both static ports and it solved the problem.  Other Legacy builders who installed their static ports protruding slightly tell me that their indicated airspeed is accurate.

Dennis
Legacy 580 hours

--
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html

--Apple-Mail-D62F2AD3-5C0B-49EC-9648-E96C5916525E--