Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:06 AM - Re: yaw rates, correction (James R. Cunningham)
2. 07:30 AM - nitromethane (Archie)
3. 08:19 AM - Re: nitromethane (James R. Cunningham)
4. 08:35 AM - Re: nitromethane (Dirk Slabbert)
5. 08:36 AM - Re: nitromethane (Edward Chmielewski)
6. 09:00 AM - Re: nitromethane ()
7. 09:13 AM - Re: nitromethane (Johnny Johnson)
8. 09:13 AM - Re: nitromethane (James R. Cunningham)
9. 09:16 AM - Re: nitromethane (James R. Cunningham)
10. 09:33 AM - Re: nitromethane (steve korney)
11. 04:44 PM - nitromethane- FINAL commentary from Archie (Archie)
12. 07:00 PM - Re: nitromethane- FINAL commentary from Archie (UFOBUCK@aol.com)
13. 08:10 PM - Re: nitromethane- FINAL commentary from Archie (George Bass)
14. 08:13 PM - Re: Drag racing discussion. (Dean Psiropoulos)
15. 09:30 PM - Re: Re: Drag racing discussion. (Robert McCallum)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: yaw rates, correction |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>
Me too.
Jim Cunningham
Cunningham Engineering Assoc.
steve korney wrote:
> Thanks Archie...
>
> I'm sure all of my engineering friends will readily accept that
> explanation...
>
> Best... Steve
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 |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
> Me too.
> Jim Cunningham
> Cunningham Engineering Assoc.
>
> steve korney wrote:
>
> > Thanks Archie...
> >
> > I'm sure all of my engineering friends will readily accept that
> > explanation...
> >
> > Best... Steve
Gentlemen;
Do I detect an air of sarcasm and/or apprehension?
I am sure that as fellow engineers, you understand that
we could fill volumes in a effort to convey specific information
to lay persons.
This is merely a simple, analogous, dissertation that those
without relative experience in this area might find interesting.
(and most do)
Archie
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: | Re: nitromethane |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>
More apprehension, I'd say. I like to use unusual bits like these when
teaching courses in fluid mechanics, hydrology, and hydraulics, in order
to pique the students' curiosity. But in order to do so, I have to be
able to demonstrate the accuracy of the tidbits. Though the items in
this thread are fascinating, one of them is dead wrong (the average
reading speed, for example -- only 13 words in 4.5 seconds). Others are
undefined (was the nitrous consumption measurement in gas or liquid
form? What was the weight of nitrous consumed in 4.5 seconds?) That
throws all of them into some doubt and they can't be used without
further documentation.
All the best,
Jim
Archie wrote:
>
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
>
> > Me too.
> > Jim Cunningham
> > Cunningham Engineering Assoc.
> >
> > steve korney wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Archie...
> > >
> > > I'm sure all of my engineering friends will readily accept that
> > > explanation...
> > >
> > > Best... Steve
>
> Gentlemen;
> Do I detect an air of sarcasm and/or apprehension?
> I am sure that as fellow engineers, you understand that
> we could fill volumes in a effort to convey specific information
> to lay persons.
> This is merely a simple, analogous, dissertation that those
> without relative experience in this area might find interesting.
> (and most do)
>
> Archie
>
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: nitromethane |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Dirk Slabbert" <dslabbert@worldonline.co.za>
Hey Archie! give us more on that nitromethane, have you tried it? done some in
my boat racing days.
Dirk.
----- Original Message -----
From: Archie
To: engines-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 4:29 PM
Subject: Engines-List: nitromethane
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
> Me too.
> Jim Cunningham
> Cunningham Engineering Assoc.
>
> steve korney wrote:
>
> > Thanks Archie...
> >
> > I'm sure all of my engineering friends will readily accept that
> > explanation...
> >
> > Best... Steve
Gentlemen;
Do I detect an air of sarcasm and/or apprehension?
I am sure that as fellow engineers, you understand that
we could fill volumes in a effort to convey specific information
to lay persons.
This is merely a simple, analogous, dissertation that those
without relative experience in this area might find interesting.
(and most do)
Archie
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: nitromethane |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Edward Chmielewski" <edchmiel@mindspring.com>
Gents,
Better yet, if you doubt it, prove it wrong. My money's on Archie, a guy who's
been
there, done it twice.
Ed in JXN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
Subject: Engines-List: nitromethane
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
>
> > Me too.
> > Jim Cunningham
> > Cunningham Engineering Assoc.
> >
> > steve korney wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Archie...
> > >
> > > I'm sure all of my engineering friends will readily accept that
> > > explanation...
> > >
> > > Best... Steve
>
> Gentlemen;
> Do I detect an air of sarcasm and/or apprehension?
> I am sure that as fellow engineers, you understand that
> we could fill volumes in a effort to convey specific information
> to lay persons.
> This is merely a simple, analogous, dissertation that those
> without relative experience in this area might find interesting.
> (and most do)
>
> Archie
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: nitromethane |
--> Engines-List message posted by: <klwerner@comcast.net>
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Why does this discussion about validity of data have to be online, and consume
valuable space in the Archives?
If anyone doubts the data presented by Archie, then please go to the racetrack
yourself and talk to the race people about their experiences.
And when you got the answers, please verify them thoroughly, and THEN let us know
what was right or wrong.
Enough said, and let's get on with it now.
DO NOT ARCHIVE
----- Original Message -----
From: James R. Cunningham
To: engines-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: Engines-List: nitromethane
--> Engines-List message posted by: "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>
More apprehension, I'd say. I like to use unusual bits like these when
teaching courses in fluid mechanics, hydrology, and hydraulics, in order
to pique the students' curiosity. But in order to do so, I have to be
able to demonstrate the accuracy of the tidbits. Though the items in
this thread are fascinating, one of them is dead wrong (the average
reading speed, for example -- only 13 words in 4.5 seconds). Others are
undefined (was the nitrous consumption measurement in gas or liquid
form? What was the weight of nitrous consumed in 4.5 seconds?) That
throws all of them into some doubt and they can't be used without
further documentation.
All the best,
Jim
Archie wrote:
>
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
>
> > Me too.
> > Jim Cunningham
> > Cunningham Engineering Assoc.
> >
> > steve korney wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Archie...
> > >
> > > I'm sure all of my engineering friends will readily accept that
> > > explanation...
> > >
> > > Best... Steve
>
> Gentlemen;
> Do I detect an air of sarcasm and/or apprehension?
> I am sure that as fellow engineers, you understand that
> we could fill volumes in a effort to convey specific information
> to lay persons.
> This is merely a simple, analogous, dissertation that those
> without relative experience in this area might find interesting.
> (and most do)
>
> Archie
>
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 |
|
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Johnny Johnson" <Johnny@wiktel.com>
My bet is that it's safe to say most of us are tired of peacocks strutting
around... who cares? This from a degreed (ahem!!) engineer (ahem!!)... go
for it Archie!
Johnny I Are An Engenier and My Slide Rule Proves It Johnson
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-engines-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Edward
Chmielewski
Subject: Re: Engines-List: nitromethane
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Edward Chmielewski"
<edchmiel@mindspring.com>
Gents,
Better yet, if you doubt it, prove it wrong. My money's on Archie, a
guy who's been
there, done it twice.
Ed in JXN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
Subject: Engines-List: nitromethane
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
>
> > Me too.
> > Jim Cunningham
> > Cunningham Engineering Assoc.
> >
> > steve korney wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Archie...
> > >
> > > I'm sure all of my engineering friends will readily accept that
> > > explanation...
> > >
> > > Best... Steve
>
> Gentlemen;
> Do I detect an air of sarcasm and/or apprehension?
> I am sure that as fellow engineers, you understand that
> we could fill volumes in a effort to convey specific information
> to lay persons.
> This is merely a simple, analogous, dissertation that those
> without relative experience in this area might find interesting.
> (and most do)
>
> Archie
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: nitromethane |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>
Not interested enough. Have other things to do with my rather limited
free time. I'm sure Archie is correct in all regards, but I still don't
believe the 173 words/minute reading speed. :-)
All the best,
Jim
Edward Chmielewski wrote:
>
> --> Engines-List message posted by: "Edward Chmielewski" <edchmiel@mindspring.com>
>
> Gents,
> Better yet, if you doubt it, prove it wrong. My money's on Archie, a guy
who's been there, done it twice.
>
> Ed in JXN
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
> To: <engines-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Engines-List: nitromethane
>
> > --> Engines-List message posted by: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
> >
> > > Me too.
> > > Jim Cunningham
> > > Cunningham Engineering Assoc.
> > >
> > > steve korney wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks Archie...
> > > >
> > > > I'm sure all of my engineering friends will readily accept that
> > > > explanation...
> > > >
> > > > Best... Steve
> >
> > Gentlemen;
> > Do I detect an air of sarcasm and/or apprehension?
> > I am sure that as fellow engineers, you understand that
> > we could fill volumes in a effort to convey specific information
> > to lay persons.
> > This is merely a simple, analogous, dissertation that those
> > without relative experience in this area might find interesting.
> > (and most do)
> >
> > Archie
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: nitromethane |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>
Good point, consider it taken.
Jim
klwerner@comcast.net wrote:
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
> Enough said, and let's get on with it now.
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
Message 10
| 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: nitromethane |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "steve korney" <s_korney@hotmail.com>
It's OK to exagerate a little...It's even fun sometimes...But at least give
us some rule of thumb formulas...
Best... Steve...AKA (Stone Woods and Cook) for those of you old enough to
remember...
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Edward Chmielewski"
To:
Subject: Re: Engines-List: nitromethane
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Edward Chmielewski"
Gents,
Better yet, if you doubt it, prove it wrong. My money's on Archie, a guy
who's been
there, done it twice.
Ed in JXN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Archie"
To:
Subject: Engines-List: nitromethane
>--> Engines-List message posted by: "Archie"
>
> > Me too. > Jim Cunningham > Cunningham Engineering Assoc. > > steve
>korney wrote: > > > Thanks Archie... > > > > I'm sure all of my engineering
>friends will readily accept that > > explanation... > > > > Best... Steve
>
>Gentlemen; Do I detect an air of sarcasm and/or apprehension? I am sure
>that as fellow engineers, you understand that we could fill volumes in a
>effort to convey specific information to lay persons. This is merely a
>simple, analogous, dissertation that those without relative experience in
>this area might find interesting. (and most do)
>
>Archie
Get MSN 8 and enjoy automatic e-mail virus protection.
Message 11
| 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: | nitromethane- FINAL commentary from Archie |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Archie" <archie97@earthlink.net>
Again gentlemen;
Appreciate the comments from those who "know" what I
am writing about.
Yes, as I was entering the world of drag racing, Stone, Woods,
& Cook were nationally known "gassers".
Correction: Nitrous is a combustion enhancer largely used
by street performance people, and most "mountain motor"
racers, not to be confused with Nitromethane which is a liquid.
(spgr 1.13@68f)
Today;s nitro burning drag cars are limited to 500 cu in
displacement, and 90% nitro. Methanol is the other 10% used.
This was in an effort to keep the ever increasing speeds down,
but racers in a never ending quest for performance will
"find a way" to go faster.
As stated before, formulas can begin with the manufacture of every
component utilized in achieving the statements previously indicated,
on to thermal energy, latent heat, friction, (Internal & external),
metallurgy, timing, etc, etc, etc.
This just requires some simple research, as I had performed in
composing the analogous list.
Well, there is only one college of this combined effort we call
Top Fuel Racing, and it is located at every drag race track in the country.
I've paid my dues, and although I have a BSIE, I have also earned
my Master's in the fuel racing school of hard work, experimenting,
overtime, broken parts, and an outlay of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
Archie
Message 12
| 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: nitromethane- FINAL commentary from Archie |
--> Engines-List message posted by: UFOBUCK@aol.com
Archie-
Besides Stone, Woods and Cook don't forget Big John Mazmanian & Ohio George.
Long live the "AA" Gasser !
Message 13
| 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: nitromethane- FINAL commentary from Archie |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "George Bass" <George_Bass_0@hotmail.com>
Hell, I remember when Don Garlitts used to
test his machine on the nice straight highway
goin' North out of Tampa.
Even watched it a time or two.
George
---
Message 14
| 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: Drag racing discussion. |
--> Engines-List message posted by: "Dean Psiropoulos" <deanpsir@easystreet.com>
Just FYI:
I spent the last two years doing flight testing of my company's HUD system
in the New Generation 737 airplanes (737-700/800/900). These airplanes
have the latest generation CFM-56 turbofans which are some of the most fuel
efficient in the industry. Together they produce about 60,000 lbs thrust,
appx. equivalent to ONE Pratt and Whitney PW4000 engine on the 747-400.
When I wasn't directing the flight test or taking data I'd often watch the
mounds of information being displayed on the airplane's fantastic glass
cockpit. At full throttle (lightly loaded or full gross it didn't matter)
those two engines drink 10 pounds of fuel (the lowest limit of what the
guage can read) every two seconds. That's 5 pounds of fuel per second or a
little less than 1 gallon of turbine fuel EVERY SECOND (fuel burn at cruise
varied between 2-4 pounds per second depending on altitude and throttle
setting). Really puts the 8 gallons an HOUR of the 0-360 in my soon to be
flying RV-6A in perspective! Don't know if the fuel burn of the 747 would
be linear compared to the CFM-56 but my guess is that that baby burns around
20 pounds of kerosene per second. Have you got a big enough tank on your
airplane to feed engines drinking 4 gallons every SECOND?
Dean Psiropoulos
RV-6A finish kit
Message 15
| 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: RE: Drag racing discussion. |
--> Engines-List message posted by: Robert McCallum <robert.mccallum2@sympatico.ca>
Dean Psiropoulos wrote:
>
>Just FYI:
>
>
>I spent the last two years doing flight testing of my company's HUD system
>(SNIP) Have you got a big enough tank on your
>airplane to feed engines drinking 4 gallons every SECOND?
>
>
>Dean Psiropoulos
>
>RV-6A finish kit
>
>
>
This is not directed at you Dean; just a comment on this whole dragged
out thread.
Is there any particularly good reason why we are filling Matt's
expensive archives with these fascinating OFF TOPIC discussions?????
What ever happened to the good old fashioned common courtesy of the
simple words " DO NOT ARCHIVE " when these ramblings come up so as not
to fill so much of Matt's valuable computer space ?? Don't get me wrong,
I enjoy reading the information, I just don't think that it is necessary
to archive it all. One persons opinion. Thanks
Bob McC
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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! --
|