Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 01:28:48 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1965942@logan.com>
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.90.130.75; envelope-from=mmcmanus@grandecom.net
From: mmcmanus@grandecom.net
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Indicated Airspeed Error
References: <list-1965410@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-1965410@logan.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.3

I have heard RV guys talking about IAS errors based on the location of the
static port (on RVs).
Matt McManus
LNC2 360

Quoting RicArgente@cs.com:

> Hello folks,
>
> Thanks much to all that have responded to my inquiry.
>
> Ok, so a blocked static port would yield a lower airspeed reading, so that is
> probably not it.
>
> As most have mentioned on this forum, the location of the static port could
> be the problem and maybe off a bit, maybe by a lot?  I will check the
> construction manuals to determine the suggested location of the static port
> and compare that with ours.  As Paul and others suggested, we may have to
> move the static port aft from its current position.
>
> I posted the same inquiry on the ES yahoo group and so far nobody seems to
> have the same problem.  The ES folks have posted similar analysis as to what
> could be wrong (i.e. static port location).
>
> BTW, we only have one static port on the ES and no alternate static port.
>
> As I mentioned on an earlier post, we neglected to verify or compare our
> altitude readings during our formation flight.
>
> Thanks again!
> Rick Argente
> N360ZR
> N82500
>
> --
> For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
>
>