Return-Path: Received: from [65.54.168.116] (HELO hotmail.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.5) with ESMTP id 551102 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:55:47 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.54.168.116; envelope-from=lors01@msn.com Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Tue, 30 Nov 2004 07:55:15 -0800 Message-ID: Received: from 65.54.97.141 by BAY3-DAV12.phx.gbl with DAV; Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:54:28 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [65.54.97.141] X-Originating-Email: [lors01@msn.com] X-Sender: lors01@msn.com From: "Tracy Crook" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: high oil temps must end Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:51:47 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0039_01C4D6CA.96AE4E00" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: MSN 9 X-MimeOLE: Produced By MSN MimeOLE V9.10.0009.2900 Seal-Send-Time: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:51:47 -0500 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Nov 2004 15:55:15.0312 (UTC) FILETIME=[FB810F00:01C4D6F4] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0039_01C4D6CA.96AE4E00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message I found a flaw in my oil temp instrumentation on last flight and my = oil temp is not quite as low as I thought, but still very good. I got = it up to 200 on a full power climb at 69 deg OAT. =20 What did you climb to, 1500 feet :-) How about taking off, and = climbing at full throttle, and 100 mph to 8000 ft. Staying below 210 = during that test, in the middle of the summer is my criteria for oil = cooling. =20 Rusty =20 Hmm, 1500 ft, that would be about 33 seconds of climb for me : ) Didn't write it down but top of climb was about 4000 ft and oil temp = had stabilized. IAS was very close to 100 mph which is well below my = best cooling climb speed of 120 - 130 mph. I really don't mind using = the higher speed after the first 1000 ft so my criteria is not quite as = severe as yours.=20 FWIW, accepting a lower performance from cooling system in climb = results in better top end and cruise performance. Not a law of physics, = but in the real world of limited time and money, it's true. =20 BTW, that was very good advice from Al Gietzen on calibrating the EM2. = I bought that IR temp gauge he suggested and it's the berries, or = should I say 'The Bomb' to avoid showing my age. Tracy (chaining self to workbench to fill backordered stuff) ------=_NextPart_000_0039_01C4D6CA.96AE4E00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
 

I found a flaw=20 in my oil temp instrumentation on last flight and my oil temp is not = quite as=20 low as I thought, but still very good.  I got it up to 200 on a = full=20 power climb at 69 deg OAT.   
 
What did you=20 climb to, 1500 feet :-)  How about taking off, and climbing at = full=20 throttle, and 100 mph to 8000 ft.  Staying below 210 during that = test, in=20 the middle of the summer is my criteria for oil=20 cooling.  
 
Rusty  
 
Hmm, 1500 ft, that would be about 33 = seconds of climb=20 for me : )
 Didn't write it down but top of climb = was about=20 4000 ft and oil temp had stabilized.  IAS was very close to 100 = mph which=20 is well below my best cooling climb speed of 120 - 130 mph.  I = really=20 don't mind using the higher speed after the first 1000 ft so = my criteria=20 is not quite as severe as yours. 
 
FWIW, accepting a lower performance from = cooling=20 system in climb results in better top end and cruise = performance.  Not=20 a law of physics, but in the real world of limited time and = money, it's=20 true. 
 
BTW, that was very good advice from Al = Gietzen on=20 calibrating the EM2.  I bought that IR temp gauge he suggested = and it's=20 the berries, or should I say 'The Bomb' to avoid showing my = age.
 
Tracy  (chaining self to workbench to = fill=20 backordered stuff)
------=_NextPart_000_0039_01C4D6CA.96AE4E00--