Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 12:33:18 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.4.60] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b6) with ESMTP id 1701754 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 12:24:53 -0400 Received: from 208-59-158-92.s92.tnt2.frdb.va.dialup.rcn.com ([208.59.158.92] helo=OFFICE) by smtp01.mrf.mail.rcn.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #6) id 17hYHr-0001CT-00 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 21 Aug 2002 12:24:52 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <007401c2492f$8c59c860$259e3bd0@OFFICE> From: "Bill & Sue" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] LNC2 Performance vs Altitude X-Original-Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 12:26:47 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0071_01C2490E.04D5B780" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0071_01C2490E.04D5B780 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There are other items that affect a successful and quick flight. 9000 = ft doesn't get you over every mountain, into a 50 Kt tailwind, or out of = all turbulence. I just find my cross country performance has been best = at 7500, 8000, 8500 and 9000 ft altitudes, all other things being equal. Yes, I agree, all other things being equal. They usually aren't = though. I had mine at FL210 only once and the object was just to see if = it would do it. The airplane was barely hanging in the air. With full = throttle I was probably getting what, maybe 20% power? I don't think = that it would be a practical altitude except in extremely limited = circumstances. I have, however, found the altitudes between 10 and 18 to = be quite reasonable (with oxygen). In the winter going east you can gain = substantial ground speeds over altitudes below 10 and often a smoother = ride. Ya just gotta match the altitude to the mission circumstances and = have oxygen if you're going high.=20 Bill harrelson@erols.com N5ZQ LNC2 O-320=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0071_01C2490E.04D5B780 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
There are = other items that=20 affect a successful and quick flight.  9000 ft doesn't get you = over every=20 mountain, into a 50 Kt tailwind, or out of all turbulence.  I = just find=20 my cross country performance has been best at 7500, 8000, 8500 and = 9000 ft=20 altitudes, all other things being = equal.
Yes, I = agree, all other=20 things being equal.  They usually aren't though. I had mine at = FL210 only=20 once and the object was just to see if it would do it. The airplane = was barely=20 hanging in the air. With full throttle I was probably getting what, = maybe=20 20% power? I don't think that it would be a practical = altitude=20 except in extremely limited circumstances. I have, = however, found=20 the altitudes between 10 and 18 to be quite reasonable (with oxygen). = In the=20 winter going east you can gain substantial ground speeds over = altitudes=20 below 10 and often a smoother ride. Ya just gotta match the = altitude to=20 the mission circumstances and have oxygen if you're going=20 high. 
 
Bill
harrelson@erols.com=
N5ZQ  =20 LNC2   O-320 

 ------=_NextPart_000_0071_01C2490E.04D5B780--