X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao02.cox.net ([68.230.241.37] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.4) with ESMTP id 1406928 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 17 Sep 2006 10:03:01 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.37; envelope-from=alventures@cox.net Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao02.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060917140217.PQDZ12581.fed1rmmtao02.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net> for ; Sun, 17 Sep 2006 10:02:17 -0400 Received: from BigAl ([72.192.132.90]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id PS2K1V00B1xAn3c0000000 Sun, 17 Sep 2006 10:02:19 -0400 From: "Al Gietzen" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Flight test Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 07:02:31 -0700 Message-ID: <000001c6da61$eb01e290$6400a8c0@BigAl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C6DA27.3EA30A90" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C6DA27.3EA30A90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Flight test =20 Basically the reason for the low rpm numbers while flying level is = because the power was pulled back. MAP was only 19". What rpm do you get at = 19" MAP? =20 Al, I think that my RPM at that MAP is about 4400 RPM's, but I have a = ground adjustable IVO, and I have changed it several times, trying to see what changes I get in climb performance vs cruise. I have flown quite a bit = at 60-65% power, and I get a fuel burn rate of about 7-8 gallons per hour, flying at about 140 kts. I found that is probably my best "economy" = cruise setting. =20 Steve; My rpm at 19" was about 4450, so that is consistent. I think the issue = is that it was not 65-70% power. The fuel burn was reading 16-18 gph, = (mixture bar on EM2 showing about 2/3 scale) which is translating into the high = power readings. I think I have to change the FF CAL constant. Tracy - I've left the default 151 in for FFCAL. Prior to running a = couple tanks of fuel to calibrate, is there some other good guess for what this should be for a 20B with 500-550 cc/min injectors? I'm wondering = whether for three rotors it should be 1.5 times the number for 2 rotors. =20 I think that two pilots for that task is a much safer approach. =20 =20 I agree. My test pilot feels he needs to expand the envelope a bit more before taking me along. I didn't do that this last flight because he = didn't have is parachute. Probably next time. He's a cautious guy; and I = guess that is not all bad. =20 Thanks for input. =20 Al =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C6DA27.3EA30A90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Flight test

Basically the reason for the low rpm numbers while flying level is because the = power was pulled back. MAP was only 19”. What rpm do you get at 19” MAP?

Al, I think = that my RPM at that MAP is about 4400 RPM's, but I have a ground adjustable IVO, = and I have changed it several times, trying to see what changes I get in climb performance vs cruise. I have flown quite a bit at 60-65% = power, and I get a fuel burn rate of about 7-8 gallons per hour, flying at about = 140 kts. I found that is probably my best "economy" cruise = setting.

Steve;

My rpm at 19” was about = 4450, so that is consistent. I think the issue is that it was not 65-70% power. The fuel burn was reading 16-18 gph, (mixture bar on EM2 = showing about 2/3 scale) which is translating into the high power readings. = I think I have to change the FF CAL constant.

Tracy – I’ve left the default 151 in for FFCAL. = Prior to running a couple tanks of fuel to calibrate, is there some other good = guess for what this should be for a 20B with 500-550 cc/min injectors? = I’m wondering whether for three rotors it should be 1.5 times the number for = 2 rotors.

I think that = two pilots for that task is a much safer approach.

I agree. My test pilot = feels he needs to expand the envelope a bit more before taking me along. I = didn’t do that this last flight because he didn’t have is = parachute. Probably next time. He’s a cautious guy; and I guess that is = not all bad.

Thanks for = input.

Al

------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C6DA27.3EA30A90--