Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:33 AM - Re: Windscreen and Windows (Nigel Charles)
2. 12:33 AM - Re: was Re: G-OWWW first flight .now a debate about Throttle/power levers. (Nigel Charles)
3. 02:12 AM - Re: was Re: G-OWWW first flight .now a debate aboutThrottle/power levers. (LTS)
4. 02:12 AM - debate about Throttle/power levers. (LTS)
5. 07:54 AM - Re: Europa-List Digest: 14 Msgs - 02/27/03 (Doug Lawton)
6. 08:44 AM - Re: 100 year party? (John & Paddy Wigney)
7. 11:15 AM - Re: debate about Throttle/power levers. (M.J. Gregory)
8. 02:03 PM - Wires through the firewall (Richard)
9. 02:58 PM - Re: Wires through the firewall (Richard Holder)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Windscreen and Windows |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Nigel Charles" <nigelcharles@tiscali.co.uk>
>In looking at the different options that Europa lists for their windscreens
and windows, I was wondering if the prices are justified. Does it really
cost
another $200 to put a vent in one window? or $200 to add a bulge for the
bugeye windows? or $310 for a thicker windshield?<
If you want good ventilation for less money you could look at using a pair
of eyeball vents in combination with an outward opening flap in the overhead
panel which is what I have done. This provides a good supply of air very
close to the head where you need it. The cost is the price of two eyeball
vents plus a few items of hardware, some 'bid', resin and a piece of 3mm ply
for reinforcing.
Nigel Charles
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: | Re: G-OWWW first flight .now a debate about Throttle/power |
levers.
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Nigel Charles" <nigelcharles@tiscali.co.uk>
>Also if I remember correctly, for a given power setting, best economy is
achieved with the combination of maximum MP (allowable) with the minimum RPM
for that power setting. This may only be the case for radials ...... I'm
not sure.<
This may be true in theory. With a Rotax powered Europa it seems to be true
in practice if you are operating at an economy cruise
of 105kts. However I have found that at 125kts it doesn't make any
difference whether the rpm is 4500 with low MAP or 5000 with a higher MAP.
Although it was 6 months ago I last checked this the figures below were what
I remembered achieving. My Europa is a Classic Monowheel with 912S/Airmaster
prop.
Speed (kts) RPM Fuel Flow (litres/hr)
105 4500 13.5
105 5000 15.5
125 4500 17
125 5000 17
Regards
Nigel Charles
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: G-OWWW first flight .now a debate aboutThrottle/power |
levers.
--> Europa-List message posted by: "LTS" <lts@avnet.co.uk>
I quite agree. PAT and APT still ringing in my ears after 25 years ( I hope
I got those right ).
Jerry@ban-bi.com
www.Ban-bi.com or www.avnet.co.uk/touchdown
----- Original Message -----
From: "STOUT, GARRY V, CSFF2" <garrys@att.com>
Subject: RE: was RE: Europa-List: G-OWWW first flight .now a debate
aboutThrottle/power levers.
> --> Europa-List message posted by: "STOUT, GARRY V, CSFF2"
<garrys@att.com>
>
> I have been flying my Europa CS prop for 4 years. Throttle equals
> power. When I want to climb I push the throttle forward. When I want
> to descend I pull the throttle lever backward. Power equals climb, lack
> of power equals decent. I remember the words of my primary flight
> instructor some 35 years ago........pitch for airspeed, power for
> altitude.
>
> Regards,
>
> Garry V. Stout
>
> Trigear N4220S
> E-Mail: garrys@att.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Burton [mailto:markb@ordern.com]
> To: europa-list@matronics.com; ptag.dev@ukonline.co.uk
> Subject: Re: was RE: Europa-List: G-OWWW first flight .now a debate
> aboutThrottle/power levers.
>
>
> --> Europa-List message posted by: Mark Burton <markb@ordern.com>
>
>
> I hesitate to comment in the face of expert opinion, but...
>
> Irrespective of whether you have a CS prop or not, waggling the
> throttle does influence how much power the engine generates so
> Richard's statement appears reasonable. i.e. the throttle always acts
> as a power lever.
>
> The fact that the RPM doesn't change (much) for different power levels
> when using a CS prop is not really relevant.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark
>
> ---------
>
> From: "R.C.Harrison" <ptag.dev@ukonline.co.uk>
> Subject: was RE: Europa-List: G-OWWW first flight .now a debate about
> Throttle/power levers.
> Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 13:40:13 -0000
>
> > --> Europa-List message posted by: "R.C.Harrison"
> <ptag.dev@ukonline.co.uk>
> >
> > Hi! Richard.
> > I'm sorry but I disagree with your statement below that "the throttle
> is
> > always a power lever."
> > It is always the lever which regulates the intake of fuel and normally
> > associated with RPM. However if a Constant Speed Prop is restraining
> the RPM
> > to a fixed level then although the lever performs the same fuel
> control
> > function it is actually now controlling the POWER output of the engine
> > against the fixed RPM.
> > So Rotax or not you can be inflicting a call for an impossible(and
> therefore
> > damaging) power demand against the fixed constant RPM course pitched
> > propeller unless you have known manifold pressure parameters within
> which to
> > stay.
> > I will be very interested how you present your case and the outcome of
> the
> > argument you are destined to have.
> > Regards
> > Bob Harrison G-PTAG
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Richard
> > Holder
> > To: europa-list@matronics.com
> > Subject: Europa-List: G-OWWW first flight.
> >
> >
> > > On the Manifold Pressure question, without one you will never know
> whether
> > > you are running the engine constantly overloaded or not, with the CS
> > > prop.your throttle becomes a power lever since the RPM control is
> done by
> > > the prop.
> >
> > Actually the throttle is ALWAYS a power lever, CS or no. What you
> mean, I
> > think, is that with CS the tacho is NOT a measure of power.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
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: | debate about Throttle/power levers. |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "LTS" <lts@avnet.co.uk>
Yes power is a sort of product of rpm and MAP. I have recently done a load
of flight testing for Mark Burton using a VP prop, fuel computer and
manifold pressure gauge to determine the Rotax power curve for different
MAPs and RPMs. As a result Mark has now refined the power display on his
Constant Speed propeller controller so that it gives a good indication of
%age power based on MAP and rpm. Interestingly speed and fuel flow
correlated very well and for a given fuel flow similar speeds were produced
regardless of MAP and rpm (within reasonable limits). I have flown my
aircraft with VP prop for almost 300 hours using a fuel flow gauge rather
than MAP. This worked very well for me as I could see the %age power I was
using at any time. I have to say now I have been flying with a Constant
speed upgrade which also gives me MAP I like the quick response of the MAP
gauge compared to the fuel flow meter. Having the MAP and rpm linked to give
power as %age power means you can throttle up to your desired power setting
quite easily with fewer adjustments. MAP is also cheaper than a fuel
computer so I think I would be tempted to rely more on that in future.
For a fixed pitch propeller operating at a set height the %age power should
be determined from the prop speed alone providing you know the engine power
at full throttle. That is to say if your Rotax 912 and fixed pitch propeller
for example are configured to give 5500 rpm at full throttle in level flight
that's 79hp from memory at sea level. Using a cube rule the hps at rpms can
be calculated.
5500 is 79 hp
5400 is 75 hp
5300 is 71 hp
5200 is 67 hp
5100 is 63 hp
5000 is 59 hp
4900 is 56 hp
etc.
However as the aircraft moves slower at lower power settings the propeller
becomes more heavily loaded (higher MAP) and this simple method can not
actually be used with total accuracy. In practice the lower power settings
will be predicted lower than they actually are.
Jerry
Jerry@ban-bi.com
www.Ban-bi.com or www.avnet.co.uk/touchdown
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kingsley Hurst" <hurstkr@growzone.com.au>
Subject: Re: was RE: Europa-List: G-OWWW first flight .now a debate about
Throttle/power levers.
> --> Europa-List message posted by: "Kingsley Hurst"
<hurstkr@growzone.com.au>
>
> All
>
> I'll stand being corrected if I am wrong but if I remember correctly what
I
> learned over 30 years ago when I did my commercial subjects, the power of
an
> engine is proportional to Manifold Pressure (controlled by the throttle
> and/or altitude in the case of a normally aspirated engine) and is also
> proportional to Revs per minute (RPM)
>
> Given that the RPM remains constant, less throttle (MP) = Less Power, more
> throttle (MP) = More Power
> also
> Given that the MP (throttle setting) remains constant, less RPM = Less
> Power, more RPM = More Power
>
> It therefore follows that for a given power setting, there are many
> combinations of MP and RPM that will do the trick.
>
> Also if I remember correctly, for a given power setting, best economy is
> achieved with the combination of maximum MP (allowable) with the minimum
RPM
> for that power setting. This may only be the case for radials ...... I'm
> not sure.
>
> With a normally aspirated engine, if you are cruising at say 8,000 ft on
> full throttle and wish to climb to say 10,000 ft, the only way extra power
> can be attained is to INCREASE the RPM assuming you were already cruising
at
> less than Max RPM and ignoring mixture settings.
>
> I note John Wigney has already covered what Rotax has to say so I would
like
> to make the comment that with a 912 as in my case, I cannot see why a MP
> gauge should be mandatory but it is certainly desirable if one wishes to
get
> the best out of the engine both in performance and economy otherwise one
is
> just guessing.
>
> Since power is proportional to mp AND rpm, what would be the point in
having
> one gauge and not the other?
>
> Just my two bobs worth. I think manifold pressure may be abbreviated as
MAP
> nowadays but I'm sure it was MP once upon a time!!
>
> Regards
>
> Kingsley
>
>
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: Europa-List Digest: 14 Msgs - 02/27/03 |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Doug Lawton" <skyrider2@earthlink.net>
There's this:
http://www.countdowntokittyhawk.com/
Others, I'm sure.
Doug
NE Georgia & Whitwell TN
I haven't heard much about what is planned for the 100th Anniversary. Will
there be a fly in? Is there adequate tiedown space? Camping availability?
I'd be interested in going if there were more details available.
Regards,
Garry V. Stout
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: 100 year party? |
--> Europa-List message posted by: John & Paddy Wigney <johnwigney@worldnet.att.net>
>
>
>--> Europa-List message posted by: "STOUT, GARRY V, CSFF2" <garrys@att.com>
>I haven't heard much about what is planned for the 100th Anniversary.
>Will there be a fly in? Is there adequate tiedown space? Camping
>availability? I'd be interested in going if there were more details
>available.Regards,Garry V. Stout
>
Hi Garry,
Here is what little I know. First Flight airfield (KFFA) at Kitty
Hawk/Kill Devil Hills is a 3000 ft strip with a limited ramp area. It is
designed for brief stops and I will be surprised if it is not off-limits
on Dec 17th since there will no chance of enough space for everybody to
get in there. I was there in September last year.
Dare County Regional Airport in Manteo (KMQI) is the nearest airport and
is about 6 miles to the south across Roanoke Sound. They have a website
at < http://www.fly2mqi.com/ > which shows that they are expecting 2000
to 3000 visitors a day around that time for a week long celebration. The
field has extensive plans for tie-downs over much of their black top and
grass, fees run from $20 to $160 per day depending on the day and how
close you want to be to the terminal. Manteo is just one of the many
places putting on a show at that time, but it is the nearest to Kitty Hawk.
Cheers, John
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: | debate about Throttle/power levers. |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "M.J. Gregory" <m.j.gregory@talk21.com>
It may help to add a little more theory to the discussion. The points below
are based on a posting I made to the former Europa Forum on 30 March 2000:
The action of the throttle is to reduce the manifold pressure from ambient
(or higher if you have a turbo-charged engine) to a working value for the
power required.
The power is directly proportional to the rate of mass flow of air through
the engine, which is proportional to the r.p.m. multiplied by the inlet air
density. For a given inlet temperature, density is proportional to the
absolute pressure, which is directly controlled by the throttle, as is
measured by a manifold absolute pressure (MAP) gauge.
With any given throttle setting, the manifold pressure goes down with
increasing r.p.m., as the engine is sucking more air past the restriction of
the throttle aperture, causing a pressure drop.
There are, however, other effects that alter the efficiency of the engine so
that the theoretical power output is never reached. These account also for
the shape of the power output curve, which normally rises with r.p.m. but
may reach a peak and even reduce at very high r.p.m.
With a constant-speed prop, a combination of r.p.m. and manifold pressure is
the usual way of knowing how much power is set. An alternative is fuel flow:
given a correct mixture setting, this is a good indicator of mass flow and
hence power.
With a fixed-pitch prop, at a known setting calibrated for your aircraft
(following for example trials measuring fuel flow at a range of altitudes,
corrected for ambient temperature), you should be able simply to use r.p.m.
to set your cruise to normal, fast or economical and relax.
Mike
Europa Club Safety Officer
m.j.gregory@cranfield.ac.uk
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: | Wires through the firewall |
--> Europa-List message posted by: "Richard" <riddon@btinternet.com>
Anyone got any clever ideas for supporting & protecting wiring where it
passes through the firewall? I have bought a couple of nylon cable glands
which would work well but I am having second thoughts about using them due
to the fact that they are not 'fireproof'
Richard Iddon G-RIXS (finished painting last night. Yippee!!)
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: Wires through the firewall |
--> Europa-List message posted by: Richard Holder <rholder@avnet.co.uk>
I used AMP connectors. This allows easy removal of the panel. I used three
through the firewall and one into the transmission tunnel from behind the
panel.
The three were (roughly)
4 way for the mags (need to keep separate)
14 way for the firewall stuff (regulator, starter)
16 way for the engine stuff (tacho, sensors)
The one in the transmission tunnel is 23 way for fuel pump, gauge, flaps,
trim, strobe power.
Connectors are available from RS, I can give references if you wish.
Richard
Richard F.W. Holder 01279 842804 (POTS)
Bell House, Bell Lane, 01279 842942 (fax)
Widford, Ware, Herts, 07860 367423 (mobile)
SG12 8SH email : rholder@avnet.co.uk
PA-28-181 : Piper Archer : G-JANA, EGSG (Stapleford)
Europa Classic Tri-gear : G-OWWW, being flight tested
> From: "Richard" <riddon@btinternet.com>
> Reply-To: europa-list@matronics.com
> Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2003 22:03:39 -0000
> To: "Europa Matronics Forum" <europa-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Europa-List: Wires through the firewall
>
> --> Europa-List message posted by: "Richard" <riddon@btinternet.com>
>
> Anyone got any clever ideas for supporting & protecting wiring where it
> passes through the firewall? I have bought a couple of nylon cable glands
> which would work well but I am having second thoughts about using them due
> to the fact that they are not 'fireproof'
>
> Richard Iddon G-RIXS (finished painting last night. Yippee!!)
>
>
>
>
>
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! --
|