Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:11 PM - Re: OSH (Brian Proett)
2. 03:49 PM - Re: more prop test info (Dave)
3. 05:40 PM - Re: more prop test info (Dave)
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 |
|
Nick
I am going to be visiting family Aug 21-28 in Houston. I was thinking that
I would not be missed if I slipped out to stop by Tenn to actually see a
lightning in person. Would you be available with a lightning to give me a
demo?
I will also be back in the states in November but it will be more difficult
to take a couple of days then.
My repatriation date as been pushed to Sept next year - one year off. I
would be considering that time frame for an airplane purchase. So I still
have a bit of time.
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of flylightning
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 5:42 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: OSH
Peter,
You going to fly VH-PDI to the show next year?
Nick
_____
From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of peter disher
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 2:31 AM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: OSH
Thanks Buz for your big effort on reporting on Oshkosh, I enjoyed reading
about whats happing, I'm just hoping I can make it next year.
Many thanks
Pete D
VH-PDI
----- Original Message -----
From: N1BZRich@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2009 1:24 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: OSH
All,
I am home from Oshkosh and just started working on the next newsletter.
Hope to have it out sometime this weekend or early next week. Overall it
was a very good convention. Total number of showplanes was up and there
were actually slightly more homebuilts than vintage aircraft this year.
Great. I think total attendance was also up - it sure seemed that way. One
important thing for everyone to consider - only 355 days until the start of
Oshkosh 2010.
Blue Skies,
Buz
_____
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
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: more prop test info |
Bob
19.5 degrees @ 9 inches in from tip
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Haas
To: lightning-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 2:03 PM
Subject: RE: Lightning-List: more prop test info
Hey Dave what index was the adjustable pitch set at? Bob Haas N330BH
Thanks.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-lightning-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 7:51 PM
To: lightning-list@matronics.com
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: more prop test info
Buz
I put the 62FK60 on today. Don't know what to think just yet.
Testing was done at 3,000 ft, 85 degrees and indicated only
new prop-----------
RPM Fuel burn Speed mph
2850 8.1 152
2750 6.6 146
2650 5.7 140
WOT 3,000 rpm, static 2560 rpm at WOT the EGT was 1450 degrees
composite ground adjustable (old prop)
2850 6.1 145
2650 5.1 137
WOT 3200 RPM
I reached the 150 mph point but lost 2 gal per hr. Short story
long--- what are you running for jetting and I am thinking this may be
an altitude prop--not used for skud running? Nick or Buz, what jetting
is needed?
Thanks for any advise
Dave McC
----- Original Message -----
From: N1BZRich@aol.com
To: lightning-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, March 22, 2009 10:48 PM
Subject: Lightning-List: more prop test info
All,
Some time ago I sent out a report on the results of the prop
testing I have been doing on N31BZ with the Sensenich 62FK60. (remember
BZ has the older solid lifter engine) Those emails listed the true
airspeeds vs. RPMs that I was seeing. As a follow up to that message I
have been doing some additional testing the last several days to come up
with some fuel flow numbers with the new prop. Most of you that have
been on the list for a while know that my cross country technique is to
set a fuel flow (not an rpm) and accept the airspeed and rpm that the
fuel flow gives me at the altitude I am using for the trip. Since I am
planning another trip to SYI early this coming week, I figured I had
better get at least some "ball park" fuel usage numbers before I make
this next trip.
On cross country flights I normally cruise at an altitude that
does two things for me - I am looking for lowest headwinds and smooth
flight conditions. If there is a tail wind, I go up high to take
advantage of that, often cruising as high as 14,500 when west bound
(yes, I have a small O2 bottle). Normally, I seem to end up in the
altitude band between say 6 to 12 thousand feet, so that is where I have
been doing most of the testing the last few days. Oh, one other thing,
the OATs have been running slightly cooler than a standard day. For
example density altitude has been about 300 below indicated altitude.
Below are the results I have seen during recent flights over the
last few days:
-Since I normally set 6 gph I did a lot of those test. As it turns
out, 6 gph seems to give me in the neighborhood of 162 to 165 mph true
airspeed (weight makes a difference). I should also note that I tried
to do most of the test when I had the tanks full (except for that burned
during climb out) but with only me and approx 30 pounds in the baggage
area (31BZ is probably around a 1200 lb airplane with that load).
-However, I noticed something interesting (with the prop and set up
I am now using) when I pulled the fuel flow back below 6 gph. It
appears that:
5.5 gph gives 155 mph,
5.0 gph = 150,
4.5 gph = 145,
4.0 gph = 140,
and 3.5 gph was right at 135 mph. I saw no reason to go slower than
that.
If these numbers prove fairly accurate during actual cross
country flights, that works out to over a 1000 mile range flying at 135
mph tas - but who wants to go that slow.
I just thought the kind of linear relationship of FF to MPH was
interesting. Of course, the time spend at the various fuel flows was
just long enough to let the mph settle down and things could be
different when I actually make the trip to SYI (probably this Tuesday).
Anyway, as normal, I will provide the data for that flight after
I get there and find the time to figure it all out more accurately.
Blue Skies,
Buz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10 or less.
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-List">http://www.mat
ronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-Listhref="http://forums.matronics.com">h
ttp://forums.matronics.comhref="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">
http://www.matronics.com/c
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Lightning-Listhttp://forums.matronics.
comhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution No virus found in this incoming
message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 270.13.45/2285 - Release Date:
08/06/09 18:17:00
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: more prop test info |
Buz
Today was prop day, I tried 3 different ones. Learned a couple of
things that may be helpful.
Had a vibration till I removed my fiberglass spinner, yes it was true,
but not balanced. Took it home and floated it in the sink with some
water also in the center. Sure enough it floated like the titanic, I
added stick on lead weights to the light side to make it float level.
my vibration was gone. Did one flight and weights stayed in place.
another thing is auto pilot, you mounted yours forward as I did, this
means the auto pilot controls through your bell crank, I found my
bushing was a "cut" off tube that I replaced and removed any play.. My
auto pilot now instead of always searching for altitude within 50 ft and
progressing, now will only search 20 then correct back to hold.
Got the composite prop back on, not sure if the FK prop is for my
Esqual. Someone may get a good deal on it for a Lightning, just not
sure.
????????????????
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: N1BZRich@aol.com
To: lightning-list@matronics.com
Sent: Friday, August 07, 2009 7:27 PM
Subject: Re: Lightning-List: more prop test info
In a message dated 8/6/2009 8:26:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
corky@hbci.com writes:
I put the 62FK60 on today. Don't know what to think just yet.
Testing was done at 3,000 ft, 85 degrees and indicated only
new prop-----------
RPM Fuel burn Speed mph
2850 8.1 152
2750 6.6 146
2650 5.7 140
WOT 3,000 rpm, static 2560 rpm at WOT the EGT was 1450 degrees
composite ground adjustable (old prop)
2850 6.1 145
2650 5.1 137
WOT 3200 RPM
I reached the 150 mph point but lost 2 gal per hr. Short story
long--- what are you running for jetting and I am thinking this may be
an altitude prop--not used for skud running? Nick or Buz, what jetting
is needed?
Thanks for any advise
Dave McC
Dave,
Finally got a chance to go for a short hop this afternoon
delivering a part to Linda. First flight since I got back from Oshkosh.
I tired to duplicate your flight conditions so flew at 3,000 feet (DA
was almost 4500') and OAT was 83 degrees which was close to your 85
degrees. With the auto pilot on and 2850 rpm set, my indicated airspeed
was 152 to 153 mph and the true airspeed was 163 to 164 mph. Fuel flow
was 5.3 gallons per hour. I then pushed the power all the way in and
WOT resulted in 3250 rpm with an indicated airspeed of 177 to 178 mph
and true airspeed of 188 to 190 mph. Fuel flow at that high rpm and low
altitude was 11.1 gph or so.
As Lynn mentioned be sure to provide some good EGT readings to
Nick so he can recommend jetting for you. Also, comparing speeds is
more accurate using true airspeeds and flying at the same density
altitude, but maybe you don't have that capability. Overall, you are
getting great results, particularly if you have not made the mods that I
have. But based on your WOT of only 3,000 rpm with your new prop, and
assuming your have a solid lifter engine with the valves set good, only
getting 3,000 rpm would tend to tell me you have a draggier airframe for
the engine to pull around. What color is your airplane? You may have a
high drag paint scheme and colors.
Blue Skies,
Buz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
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! --
|