Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 10:32 AM - Simulated single-engine settings (Tom Fisher)
2. 12:33 PM - Re: Simulated single-engine settings (nico css)
3. 12:56 PM - Re: Simulated single-engine settings (John Vormbaum)
4. 01:11 PM - Re: Simulated single-engine settings (white_rhino_ps@yahoo.com)
5. 05:30 PM - Re: Simulated single-engine settings (Donnie Rose)
6. 06:32 PM - Re: Simulated single-engine settings (Chris)
7. 07:15 PM - Re: Simulated single-engine settings (BobsV35B@aol.com)
8. 08:09 PM - Re: Simulated single-engine settings (Tom Fisher)
9. 10:07 PM - basics (Donnie Rose)
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Simulated single-engine settings |
Folks,
I'm going to do some single-engine work but I am not sure what the
numbers should be for MAP & RPM that I should use to simulate a
feathered engine environement.
Tom
C-GISS
680FLP (Mr.RPM)
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Simulated single-engine settings |
I remember 17" and 2300 on a direct drive engine. Could be wrong. I don't
know if those settings will keep a geared motor out of trouble, though.
_____
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom Fisher
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:33 AM
Subject: Commander-List: Simulated single-engine settings
Folks,
I'm going to do some single-engine work but I am not sure what the numbers
should be for MAP & RPM that I should use to simulate a feathered engine
environement.
Tom
C-GISS
680FLP (Mr.RPM)
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Simulated single-engine settings |
I thought I used around 13" and 2300 or so on my 500B direct-drive engines.
I don't know if those settings will yield zero-thrust on an IO-720 though...
_____
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of nico css
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 12:31 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Simulated single-engine settings
I remember 17" and 2300 on a direct drive engine. Could be wrong. I don't
know if those settings will keep a geared motor out of trouble, though.
_____
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom Fisher
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:33 AM
Subject: Commander-List: Simulated single-engine settings
Folks,
I'm going to do some single-engine work but I am not sure what the numbers
should be for MAP & RPM that I should use to simulate a feathered engine
environement.
Tom
C-GISS
680FLP (Mr.RPM)
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Commander-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Simulated single-engine settings |
I use 18" and 2600 rpm on my IGO 540's
Craig
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
-----Original Message-----
From: "nico css" <nico@cybersuperstore.com>
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Simulated single-engine settings
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Simulated single-engine settings |
I use 22" and 2300 rpm thereabouts=0A-=0ADonnie Rose =0A205/492-8444=0A
=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: John Vormbaum <john
@vormbaum.com>=0ATo: commander-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Saturday, August
29, 2009 2:47:20 PM=0ASubject: RE: Commander-List: Simulated single-engine
settings=0A=0A=0AI thought I used around 13" and 2300 or so on my 500B dire
ct-drive engines. I don't know if those settings will yield zero-thrust on
an IO-720 though...=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: owner-
commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@mat
ronics.com] On Behalf Of nico css=0ASent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 12:31 P
M=0ATo: commander-list@matronics.com=0ASubject: RE: Commander-List: Simulat
ed single-engine settings=0A=0A=0AI remember 17" and 2300 on a direct drive
engine. Could be wrong. I don't know if those settings will keep a geared
motor out of trouble, though. =0A-=0A=0A=0A______________________________
__=0AFrom: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commande
r-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom Fisher=0ASent: Saturday, Augu
st 29, 2009 10:33 AM=0ATo: commander-list@matronics.com=0ASubject: Commande
r-List: Simulated single-engine settings=0A=0A=0AFolks,=0A-=0AI'm going t
o do some single-engine work but I am not sure what the numbers should be f
or MAP & RPM-that I should use to simulate a feathered engine environemen
t.=0A-=0ATom=0AC-GISS=0A680FLP (Mr.RPM)=0A-=0A=0A=0Ahref="http://www.
matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?
Commander-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.
com=0Ahref="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.c
om/c=0A=0A=0A=0Ahref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List=0Ahref="http://forums.m
atronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com=0Ahref="http://www.matronics.co
===========0A=0A=0A
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Simulated single-engine settings |
Donnie Rose wrote:
> I use 22" and 2300 rpm thereabouts
For simulated zero thrust?!? That's a LOT more than zero thrust on most
direct drive engines.
Chris
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Simulated single-engine settings |
Good Evening Chris and All,
I agree with Chris in that 22' and 2300 sounds way high to me.
However, I do not think there is a canned number that can be used.
Too many variables.
What I would suggest is that you set the RPM at a low number that feels
smooth. Somewhere between 2000 and 2300 RPM. Then, throttle back until the RPM
drops out of the governing range. Follow that by adding enough MP to make
the RPM get back up to the governing range. Choose a MP that is about an
inch below what it took to get to the governing range. That will be close
enough to zero thrust for the particular weight, configuration, and speed at
which the airplane is flying.
Still just a WAG, but close enough for anyone's purpose.
There ARE valid reasons to use a higher power for a few training purposes
just as there are valid reasons to use a lower power. Once again, too many
variables to discuss in this forum, but the method described previously will
get awfully close to whatever performance would be available with the
propellor actually feathered.
If someone tells you that you must use such and such a number, all they are
telling you is that they do NOT know what they are talking about!! <G>
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park,
Downers Grove, Illinois
In a message dated 8/29/2009 8:33:11 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
cschuerm@cox.net writes:
--> Commander-List message posted by: Chris <cschuerm@cox.net>
Donnie Rose wrote:
> I use 22" and 2300 rpm thereabouts
For simulated zero thrust?!? That's a LOT more than zero thrust on most
direct drive engines.
Chris
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Simulated single-engine settings |
Thanks Bob, that was a flurry of answers, I like your method.
Tom
C-GISS
680FLP (Mr.RPM)
----- Original Message -----
From: BobsV35B@aol.com
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Simulated single-engine settings
Good Evening Chris and All,
I agree with Chris in that 22' and 2300 sounds way high to me.
However, I do not think there is a canned number that can be used.
Too many variables.
What I would suggest is that you set the RPM at a low number that
feels smooth. Somewhere between 2000 and 2300 RPM. Then, throttle back
until the RPM drops out of the governing range. Follow that by adding
enough MP to make the RPM get back up to the governing range. Choose a
MP that is about an inch below what it took to get to the governing
range. That will be close enough to zero thrust for the particular
weight, configuration, and speed at which the airplane is flying.
Still just a WAG, but close enough for anyone's purpose.
There ARE valid reasons to use a higher power for a few training
purposes just as there are valid reasons to use a lower power. Once
again, too many variables to discuss in this forum, but the method
described previously will get awfully close to whatever performance
would be available with the propellor actually feathered.
If someone tells you that you must use such and such a number, all
they are telling you is that they do NOT know what they are talking
about!! <G>
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park,
Downers Grove, Illinois
In a message dated 8/29/2009 8:33:11 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
cschuerm@cox.net writes:
Donnie Rose wrote:
> I use 22" and 2300 rpm thereabouts
For simulated zero thrust?!? That's a LOT more than zero thrust on
most
direct drive
=====================
=======================
- MATRONICS WEB FORUMS
=======================
- List Contribution Web Site sp;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I know this will draw critcism,-but pilotage based on circumstance is how
you do it.=0A-=0ADonnie Rose =0A205/492-8444=0A=0A=0A=0A
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|