X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2014 20:46:36 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from [208.113.200.248] (HELO homiemail-a43.g.dreamhost.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.8) with ESMTP id 6684555 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 12 Jan 2014 17:43:36 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=208.113.200.248; envelope-from=r.rickard@rcginc-us.com Received: from homiemail-a43.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a43.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EABA08C05F for ; Sun, 12 Jan 2014 14:43:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.84] (ip68-106-231-166.ph.ph.cox.net [68.106.231.166]) (Authenticated sender: r.rickard@rcginc-us.com) by homiemail-a43.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id CF0628C058; Sun, 12 Jan 2014 14:43:01 -0800 (PST) References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Original-Message-Id: X-Original-Cc: "lml@lancaironline.net" X-Mailer: iPad Mail (11B554a) From: Bob Rickard Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Considering purchase of N301H X-Original-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2014 15:43:01 -0700 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List For speed, I use LOP 2480 RPM, 18.2 GPH, 33MAP at FL 220 or FL 230, gives 26= 0KTAS average. 5 hour sortie duration max usually 1200nm eastbound or up to 1= 100nm westbound (STL to PHX common). I know mine is not fast by IV-P standa= rds. Rebuilt TSIO550x by BPE w 4 blade MT. For max endurance, I use 2300 RPM, 15gph, 31 MAP for 220-230 KTAS, now 6 hou= rs possible, but max range doesn't really go up that much in my personal exp= erience. I don't see the IV-P as a short hop or pattern fun kind of plane at all. It= was built for speed and efficiency up high. For 1100 nm trips with wife an= d all the clothes she can pack, you can't touch the comfort factor/speed eff= iciency up in the 20's. =20 Bob R On Jan 11, 2014, at 8:58 PM, Todd Long wrote: What is the best range speed:fuel flow people see in the IV-P? Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 11, 2014, at 11:28, "Bill Harrelson" wrote: >=20 > Joe, >=20 > The IV is a great traveling machine. You are, however, correct in your as= sessment of "just for fun" flying. In that regard you just can't beat the 36= 0. >=20 > In my experience operating an IO-550 powered IV, I have found that operati= ng at an IAS in the range that you are considering (150-160 kias) will requi= re a fuel flow of less than 10 gph. The higher altitude you fly the lower th= e fuel flow and the higher the TAS. At 14,000 ft, for example, 150 kias wil= l produce around 190 ktas with a fuel flow of less than 9 gph (depending on w= eight). This assumes, of course, LOP operation. Flying slower than these s= peeds, down to 130 kias or so, would allow squeezing a tiny bit more efficie= ncy out of the IV but it's a fairly broad topped curve at these speeds. Your= actual MPG would not be dramatically better and with a headwind might even b= e worse. >=20 > Bill Harrelson > N5ZQ 320 2,150 hrs > N6ZQ IV 450 hrs >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > LML, >=20 > I've been looking at N301H (IV) as a way to get a bit more space than my 3= 60. 301H is listed on Controller and based in palm beach. Does anyone have= any gouge on this aircraft? >=20 > I'm a little concerned that at twice the $ per flight hour I won't take it= up as often just for fun. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on cruis= ing in a IV at max range and max endurance. The BSFC of the TSIO-550 is onl= y 5-10% worse than the IO-550 according to Conti. The cruise speeds ive see= n quoted are far from the published L/D MAX ( max range) speed of the IV. C= an anyone comment on operating at a more efficient 150-160kias? >=20 > Joe Czabaranek >=20 >=20 > -- > For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.htm= l -- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html