Return-Path: Received: from swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.123] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 2881835 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 08 Dec 2003 11:18:21 -0500 Received: from h-68-166-182-146.sfldmidn.covad.net ([68.166.182.146] helo=richard) by swan.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1ATO5U-00004P-00 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 08 Dec 2003 08:18:20 -0800 Message-ID: <004101c3bda7$0b210f90$6601a8c0@richard> From: "Eric Ruttan" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Air Density at altitude Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 11:19:21 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 > Found a table of air density vs Altitude > > Sea level Density = .00237 Slug/Ft^3 > Density at 20,000 = 0.001267 Slug/Ft^3 or a 47% decrease > > So taking formula for air mass W = p*V*A with p 47% less than at sea level > means you would get 47% less air mass flow (with the same cubic feet/minute > of air volume flow) at 20,000 ft compared to what you would get at sea level > for the same volume flow. > > While cooler temps would help, it would not compensate for a 45% less air > mass flow. > > Ed But Jim does have a point. Indicated Air Speed should be an indication of mass air right? So if it cools enough at X mph IAS, it will work at any altitude at X mph IAS? And this should mean that the cooler air would give an advantage as the mass air is cooler. P.S. I, as many I am sure, deeply appreciate your work in our behalf. If we may ever assist you please let us know.