X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 09:09:17 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nk11p08mm-asmtp001.mac.com ([17.158.58.246] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.7) with ESMTP id 6564204 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 08:52:17 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=17.158.58.246; envelope-from=gw5@me.com Received: from [10.0.1.68] (cpe-071-077-249-052.ec.res.rr.com [71.77.249.52]) by nk11p08mm-asmtp001.mac.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.08(7.0.4.27.7) 64bit (built Aug 22 2013)) with ESMTPSA id <0MV800A066DQ4260@nk11p08mm-asmtp001.mac.com> for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:51:28 +0000 (GMT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.10.8794,1.0.431,0.0.0000 definitions=2013-10-25_04:2013-10-25,2013-10-25,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1308280000 definitions=main-1310250074 From: George Wehrung Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_BD4DD66E-24AA-4310-9B92-37B2DEE560F2" X-Original-Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1816\)) Subject: Re: [LML] Leaning the IO 500 X-Original-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 08:50:18 -0400 References: X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List In-reply-to: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1816) --Apple-Mail=_BD4DD66E-24AA-4310-9B92-37B2DEE560F2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Thanks Ron and Walter for responding. =20 The =E2=80=98Red Fin=E2=80=99 looks awesome!!! On Oct 25, 2013, at 7:49 AM, Walter Atkinson = wrote: > George: >=20 > You can download the PPT from the APS website. >=20 > Best Power is 75=CB=9A ROP. It will not be slower than 50dF ROP. I = suspect something is amiss in your method or measure. The TAS difference = between that and 50dF ROP will be very hard to measure--maybe a knot. = Best economy mixture changes depending on the power setting. At 60%, = it's around 10dF LOP. At 85% power, it's about 80-90dF LOP with = straight line interpolation possible. >=20 > In the example you presented, the optimal LOP mixture would be about = 15dF LOP. You are not hurting anything, but have leaned further than = optimal and are giving up performance when LOP. >=20 > The difference between Best Power and best economy at 7k feet (NA = leaned optimally) would be about 3 gph for a 3 knot loss in IAS. >=20 > BTW, 50dF ROP and 50dF LOP should be the same number. Yours were = close. The difference was probably in finding peak form the rich and = lean sides. The fact that you noted a 9 knots difference is proof that = the LOP mixture was leaner than optimal. The 40dF diff in CHT is as = expected. >=20 > You notice that 100=CB=9A ROP was the same speed as 50=CB=9A ROP is = correct. They should be so close to the same as to be essentially = immeasurable in flight! >=20 > Walter Atkinson > > (225) 939-7508 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Oct 24, 2013, at 10:47 AM, George Wehrung wrote: >=20 > Does anyone have a copy of the powerpoint presentation from the = advanced pilot seminar? I ask because I think for our plane running = 50=CB=9A ROP gives us the best performance. 50=CB=9A LOP is the best = fuel economy. >=20 > I have been collecting data especially on my cross country trip for = our IO 550. >=20 > Basically at 7,000 feet I found that at 50=CB=9A LOP I was indicating = 170 KTS TAS and 150 KIAS. >=20 > At 50=CB=9A ROP I was 179 TAS and 158 KIAS. =20 >=20 > My EGTs/CHTs: 291/1435 LOP & 330/1431 ROP. >=20 > When I tried 75=CB=9A ROP I slowed a couple of knots. At 100=CB=9A = was increased fuel consumption for no gain in airspeed. >=20 > Anyhow, I pasted some data below which was typical for the 9 leg trip = across the US last week for our ferry flight. Also note, the plane is = not painted, which may bear differences for our ES vs others. >=20 >=20 > 7000 > 2400 > 150 > 170 > 12.7 > 291 > 1435 > 50=CB=9A LOP > 7000 > 2400 > 158 > 179 > 16.6 > 330 > 1431 > 50=CB=9A ROP > 7000 > 2400 > 157 > 177 > 16.8 > 332 > 1416 > 75=CB=9A ROP > 7000 > 2400 > 157 > 177 > 17.3 > 331 > 1391 > 100=CB=9A ROP >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail=_BD4DD66E-24AA-4310-9B92-37B2DEE560F2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Thanks = Ron and Walter for responding.  

The =E2=80=98Red = Fin=E2=80=99 looks = awesome!!!




On Oct 25, 2013, at 7:49 AM, Walter Atkinson <walter@advancedpilot.com> = wrote:

Walter = Atkinson
<walter@advancedpilot.com><= /div>
(225) 939-7508





On Oct 24, 2013, at 10:47 AM, George Wehrung = wrote:

Does anyone have a copy of the = powerpoint presentation from the advanced pilot seminar?  I ask = because I think for our plane running 50=CB=9A ROP gives us the best = performance.  50=CB=9A LOP is the best fuel = economy.

I have been collecting data especially on my = cross country trip for our IO 550.

Basically at = 7,000 feet I found that at 50=CB=9A LOP I was indicating 170 KTS TAS and = 150 KIAS.

At 50=CB=9A ROP I was 179 TAS and 158 = KIAS.  

My EGTs/CHTs:  291/1435 LOP = & 330/1431 ROP.

When I tried 75=CB=9A ROP I = slowed a couple of knots.  At 100=CB=9A was increased fuel = consumption for no gain in airspeed.

Anyhow, I = pasted some data below which was typical for the 9 leg trip across the = US last week for our ferry flight.  Also note, the plane is not = painted, which may bear differences for our ES vs = others.


7000
2400
150
170
12.7
291
1435
50=CB=9A LOP
7000
2400
158
179
16.6
330
1431
50=CB=9A ROP
7000
2400
157
177
16.8
332
1416
75=CB=9A ROP
7000
2400
157
177
17.3
331
1391
100=CB=9A ROP



= --Apple-Mail=_BD4DD66E-24AA-4310-9B92-37B2DEE560F2--