X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 64 [XX] (25%) URL: contains email in url (25%) URL: contains 2 subdomains (25%) RECEIVED: Received headers not consistent with Yahoo! "FROM:" (25%) BODY: contains stock spam words Return-Path: Received: from web39104.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.87.32] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.7) with SMTP id 1918626 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 10:30:31 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.191.87.32; envelope-from=roundrocktom@yahoo.com Received: (qmail 26304 invoked by uid 60001); 13 Mar 2007 14:29:41 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=K80hOI6t/1kxiELn6TzqxbVAvocLa8K+C5o/vjB0sc9pimOt+kcWlrRwou616AKq+ueaSb0FoFoIOb/prqE3TtKQoRujeJ5nHyzFKUVwaxt5lwZaiG8C+1RuYbrpRLV8saVpRG8WxT5fVAic0m2t6hNFyWdSICoD2xFdL8DhIF8= ; Message-ID: <20070313142941.26302.qmail@web39104.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: WfmQcw4VM1ngCUgS7pLTNyrJUXlV.4VWmf4Up4E.yLfK9BYyWQbP.UPedSiSnNT9UIjKb5r3imXYWonV_Q_jEyjvgnsYEV_itr30pTgrra55QFqhKa7Fkn6ACZeW.cWjTHqWr3fOHmi069_KpieEdQ-- Received: from [216.30.135.34] by web39104.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 07:29:41 PDT Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 07:29:41 -0700 (PDT) From: thomas walter Subject: Re: The truth??? / Injector flow rate mystery solved To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-201322108-1173796181=:24876" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --0-201322108-1173796181=:24876 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Tracy, "Big" Good Engineering Term! I was more curious than anything else about the errors, but like you said if a calibration factor solves it... time to move on to another problem. Back to buiding. Tom ----- Original Message ----- From: Tracy Crook In a word, Big. But in the end, it really does not matter. Ed and I have found that after calibration (compensating for all the cumulative errors), the flow reading error under cruise conditions is insignificant. It might be intellectually gratifying to know how much error there is in all 23 sources but that would be time spent not building and not flying. A bad trade. But if someone wants to hunt them down and report on them, I'll listen with interest! Tracy (back to working on the -8, and waiting on Bluemountain - Arrrgghh.....) --------------------------------- The fish are biting. Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing. --0-201322108-1173796181=:24876 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Tracy,
 
"Big"  Good Engineering Term! <grin>
 
I was more curious than anything else about the errors, but like you said if a calibration factor solves it... time to move on to another problem.
 
Back to buiding.
 
Tom
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Tracy Crook

In a word, Big.
 
  But in the end, it really does not matter.   Ed and I have found that after calibration (compensating for all the cumulative errors), the flow reading error under cruise conditions is insignificant.  It might be intellectually gratifying to know how much error there is in all 23 sources  but that would be time spent not building and not flying.  A bad trade.  But if someone wants to hunt them down and report on them, I'll listen with interest!
 
Tracy (back to working on the -8, and waiting on Bluemountain - Arrrgghh.....)


The fish are biting.
Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing. --0-201322108-1173796181=:24876--