Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:53 AM - Re: Video while flying (harvey.rule@bell.ca)
2. 05:20 AM - wanted-- wire wheel Continental powered Piet (Michael D Cuy)
3. 05:26 AM - Re: Cruise speed... (Michael D Cuy)
4. 06:51 AM - Re: Cruise speed... (Phillips, Jack)
5. 07:11 AM - Re: Cruise speed... (Isablcorky@aol.com)
6. 07:25 AM - Re: Cruise speed... (Steve Ruse)
7. 08:58 AM - Re: Cruise speed... (Gordon Bowen)
8. 09:00 AM - Re: Cruise Speed (Shawn Wolk)
9. 09:07 AM - Re: Re: Cruise Speed (harvey.rule@bell.ca)
10. 10:07 AM - Re: Stabilizer incidence (Christian Bobka)
11. 10:21 AM - Re: Stabilizer incidence (Christian Bobka)
12. 10:25 AM - Re: Stabilizer incidence (Christian Bobka)
13. 10:45 AM - Re: Cruise speed... (walt evans)
14. 11:16 AM - cruise speeds (Michael D Cuy)
15. 11:30 AM - Re: cruise speeds (harvey.rule@bell.ca)
16. 12:49 PM - Re: cruise speeds (Steve Ruse)
17. 03:08 PM - Re: Cruise speed... (Rcaprd@aol.com)
18. 03:49 PM - Re: Cruise speed... (bike.mike)
19. 08:52 PM - Re: Re: Cruise Speed (Shawn Wolk)
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: | Video while flying |
FILETIME=[2757AF40:01C56C18]
Thank God for diddlers and money waisters!
________________________________
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Clif Dawson
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Video while flying
Stupidity is sometimes only in the mind of the beholder.
The Wrights were a couple of stupid bicycle diddlers that
didn't know you needed suspenders to hold everything up.
Then there was Edyson, Bell, Watt, etc. All stupid time
and money wasters.
Clif
----- Original Message -----
From: Rcaprd@aol.com
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Video while flying
Sounds like a fertile mind to me !!
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: | wanted-- wire wheel Continental powered Piet |
c56abb$ca4b7aa0$7281d618@knology.net>
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
Guys-- a local IA is looking to buy one. Any out there--lemmie know.
thank you,
Mike C.
He's open to GN-1's as well if not too heavy
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: Cruise speed... |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
Steve-- Lonnie Prince should have a sticker or embossed serial no. on your
prop which
has within its contents the length and pitch of your prop. It should be on
the hub area
on the height of the hub sides. I can get you his home phone offline if
you like.
Mike 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 |
|
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "Phillips, Jack" <jphillip@alarismed.com>
That's about what I see with mine. 65 - 70 mph with a 65 Continental
and a Sensenich 72 x 42 prop. A lot depends on your airspeed indicator,
and whether or not you have a real static port or just leave the
instruments open to ambient in the cockpit. Try to check your speed by
timing it both ways over a known distance, or use a GPS.
Jack Phillips, PE
Sr. Manager, Disposables Product Development
Clinical Technologies and Services
Cardinal Health
Creedmoor, NC
(919) 528-5212
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Ruse
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Cruise speed...
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Steve Ruse
<steve@wotelectronics.com>
The more reading I do, the more I see GN-1s and Pietenpols with claimed
cruise
speeds of 70, 80, & 90+ MPH. My GN-1 with an A-75 cruises at about
65mph at
2,200 RPM. Going to 2,400 or so will net me maybe an additional 5mph.
Nowhere
near the 80+ MPH I see some people claiming. Now I understand I'm in a
Pietenpol, and getting somewhere fast is not a concern, but I'm
wondering if
other people's numbers are real, or if the prop (or some other factor)
is
making my plane slow.
The prop on my plane is a fancy Prince "Q-tip" composite/wood prop, I
don't know
the exact numbers, but I am trying to get them from Prince. The
previous owner
told me this is a climb prop, and the plane came with an extra prop that
he
said was more of a cruise prop, and would give maybe 70mph.
Is the prop I'm using possibly slowing me down? The plane is right at
600lbs,
I'm only ~170lbs, and the airfoil is the original Pietenpol airfoil. I
see
some people claiming 80-85mph in GN-1s with A-65s. The higher cruise RPM
of my
A-75 should give me an advantage over them. What am I missing? Should
I
really expect to get 80+mph in cruise?
Thanks!
Steve Ruse
N6383J - KFTW
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: Cruise speed... |
Pieters and interesters,
The way I see it there are only two ways to get a Piet over 70 mph, lie
about it or straight down.
Someone in Louisiana
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: Cruise speed... |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Steve Ruse <steve@wotelectronics.com>
Thanks Mike,
I was just going to contact Prince and see what the specifics were for this
serial number. I didn't think that the length and pitch would actually
be part
of the serial number. Makes sense though. I'll have to check the numbers
tonight, and do the math that Fred was talking about.
I'm guessing that higher drag planes like Pietenpols typically see
greater prop
slip numbers than a plane with more "average" drag? I'd be interested in
hearing the cruise speeds that some people are getting with 65-85 horsepower,
particularly if you are getting greater than 80MPH cruise.
I'm going to make a ~600SM trip in my GN-1 this weekend (weather permitting),
should be fun. I'm going to Odessa (KODO), and when I called to inquire about
hangar space there, they told me there was a Pietenpol on field there. Any
chance that person is on the list?
Thanks for the help,
Steve Ruse
N6383J - KFTW
Quoting Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy
> <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
>
> Steve-- Lonnie Prince should have a sticker or embossed serial no. on your
> prop which
> has within its contents the length and pitch of your prop. It should be on
> the hub area
> on the height of the hub sides. I can get you his home phone offline if
> you like.
>
> Mike C.
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: Cruise speed... |
Third way, put on a diff type of NACA wing design, like any old Piper or Aeronca
high winger (they're laying around hangers/garages in airports all across America),
that undercambered original Piete wing design may have a tad more drag
than needed for the amount of lift created. You can pick these old wings up
for a lot cheaper than you can build them, rebuild and recover. Kick up the HP
to 100+ and then lie about getting 100kts (instead of true 90) out of your modified
Piete. Purist need not apply.
Gordon Bowen
----- Original Message -----
From: Isablcorky@aol.com
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 6:10 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Cruise speed...
Pieters and interesters,
The way I see it there are only two ways to get a Piet over 70 mph, lie about
it or straight down.
Someone in Louisiana
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: Cruise Speed |
I was getting 76 mph with a Sensenich Wood prop that limited rpm to 2200 flat
out with an A-65. Now I still get 76 mph with a two blade warp drive pitched
to throttle back to 2250 rpm and better fuel economy. My ASI reads high. These
numbers are based on many tests using a GPS in 4 directions.
Shawn Wolk
C-FRAZ Pietenpol Aircamper
C-GZOT Skyhopper 2
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: Cruise Speed |
FILETIME=[05BA0460:01C56C44]
Is that a ground adjustible prop?If it is you may want to check the
stems for cracks.Ground adjustable props don't do very well with direct
drive engines.Something to do with the torgue at the stems being
excessive.
________________________________
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Shawn
Wolk
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Re: Cruise Speed
I was getting 76 mph with a Sensenich Wood prop that limited rpm to
2200 flat out with an A-65. Now I still get 76 mph with a two blade warp
drive pitched to throttle back to 2250 rpm and better fuel economy. My
ASI reads high. These numbers are based on many tests using a GPS in 4
directions.
Shawn Wolk
C-FRAZ Pietenpol Aircamper
C-GZOT Skyhopper 2
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 |
|
d="scan'208,217"; a="1082982086:sNHT452585918"
Subject: | Re: Stabilizer incidence |
Larry,
Good to here from you.
You wrote:
Take a look at inflight photos of Piets and notice that many of them have a drooping
elevator! I know mine does and I have seen some others in the Brodhead pattern
that do also
The reason for the drooped elevator on the Piet is that it weighs something and
gravity pulls down on it. You could call it "gravitational" trimming. If the
elevator control system had a counterweight in it that counterbalanced the weight
of the elevators, the droop would not exist and the ship would fly with
more noseup tendency.
To put it another way, if you flew your ship inverted, the elevator would still
droop.
The Sleek Streak that I still have from 40 years ago shows a distinct leading edge
low position for the horizontal stab. I do not think that it is a lifting
stab.
See a classic book called "Aero Science of Free Flight" by Charles Hampson Grant available for about 10 bucks on ebay or www.bookfinder.com for discussion of lifting stabs and an otherwise unsurpassed discussion on empirically determining flight characteristics.
You wrote:
One other extreme example is the Bleriot Monoplane that has an undercambered stab.
Early designers had erroneously assumed that both surfaces lifted. That was my
elusion to the early Fleet biplanes having the camber on the top of the stabiliser
in one of the flight reports. A handful of Waco Model 10s, mostly those
destined for seaplane use, used in inverted camber airfoil on the stab to increase
effectiveness.
Chris
Braumeister und Inspektor der Flitzer und Flitzermotoren
----- Original Message -----
From: LAWRENCE WILLIAMS
To: Pietenpol-List Digest Server
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 2:54 PM
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer incidence
I just got back and have been wading through several days worth of posts. Interesting
to note the comments about the stab incidence and various "fixes" as
well as the standard aerodynamics 101 explanations.
I noticed as a kid that some old, slow free-flight models, especially the ones
with undercambered airfoils had LIFTING stabs. Sort of goes against what we
claim to be gospel in today's world. The reasoning was that with CG could be
moved further aft and not be burdened by stalls, snap-rolls and possible resulting
spins. So, how might this apply to our Piets? They are slow and have an ubdercambered
wing also.
Take a look at inflight photos of Piets and notice that many of them have a drooping
elevator! I know mine does and I have seen some others in the Brodhead
pattern that do also.
One other extreme example is the Bleriot Monoplane that has an undercambered
stab.
Let's not be too hasty in having new builders camber their stabs either on top
or on the bottom. Remember all this website does is exchange ideas and, even
though they might sound logical, it's not the poster that has his butt on the
line when it's time to go.......
Larry
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 |
|
d="jpg'145?scan'145,208,145,217"; a="1161401593:sNHT44024402"
Subject: | Re: Stabilizer incidence |
Here are two images of the Fleet Model 2 showing the horizontal stab with the camber
on the top! It would have performed beter if they had flipped it over!
Also note the different incidence angles of the wings in the photo which does not
appear in the drawing. This could be an error in repair of the fuselage at
sme point or it could be the way it really was....
Chris
Braumeister und Inspektor der Flitzer und Flitzermotoren
----- Original Message -----
From: Rcaprd@aol.com
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 12:29 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer incidence
In a message dated 6/5/2005 2:56:37 PM Central Standard Time, lnawms@msn.com
writes:
Take a look at inflight photos of Piets and notice that many of them have a
drooping elevator! I know mine does and I have seen some others in the Brodhead
pattern that do also.
Hi Larry !! Good to hear from you.
My plane fly's straight level flight, with the elevator (flippers) slightly
low. I noticed this same thing in one of the pictures that Corky sent me of
his first plane (NX41CC) in flight. I can turn around and watch, and if I pull
back on the stick to make the flippers in line with the stab, it pitches up
to a very nose up attitude. This is kind of baffling. It's one of the reasons
I installed trim tabs on the flippers, and took ALL the negative incidence
out of the stab. I think the weight of the flippers being behind the hinge (no
mass balance) is at least some of the reason for it. It still fly's straight
& level with the drooping flippers, though. It's in trim at 1850 to 1900 rpm
indicated, but my tach reads 100 rpm to low, compared to an electronic hand
held tach. If I add 100 rpm she climbs, and if I pull 100 rpm out, she descends
and picks up speed.
Those early planes, like the Bleriot Monoplane, are the only planes I know
of with an undercambered stabilizer. It seems they carry a portion of the weight
with the stab, so the C of G can be farther aft and it would also be much
more induced drag than later designs. Just think what would happen if the stab
would stall...the nose will pitch up abruptly past the Critical Angle of Attack,
and stall the main wing.
Chuck G.
It was an absolutely beautiful evening to fly. Clear blue sky, light south wind,
mid 80's. I did the River Run, then over an hour of slow flight at about
50 mph, with the power pulled back to 1700 rpm indicated, then did a Smokin'
Fly By at Beech Field. It's amazing how just put put putting around the sky can
clear all the cob webs out of my brain !!
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 |
|
d="scan'208,217"; a="1172574888:sNHT58600262"
Subject: | Re: Stabilizer incidence |
Do not confuse center of lift with pitching moment.....
Chris
Braumeister und Inspektor der Flitzer und Flitzermotoren
----- Original Message -----
From: Gordon Bowen
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer incidence
I'd expect just about every Piete that is being flown at or near the back edge
of acceptable CG limits (about 20" aft of LE wing) would need to have a little
lift developed by the horizonal stab and the elevator. Drooping elevator would
change the "airfoil" shape of the combo H.stab/elevator, therefore develop
lift, and lots of unnecessary drag. No lift coming from tail plane, nose pitches
up because of where the weight is vs the center of lift on the wing. Putting
incidence in H.stab, would only make permanent the drag. Still think the
best move is to have normally loaded CG somewhere more forward, ca. 16". Allowing
for fat pilots like me to shift the CG back to close to aft limit, when
needed, but only when needed. The only way to move "normally loaded", CG forward
is to put weight out in the engine area, much forward of the empty CG, thus
minimal additional drag, ie. a battery or a chuck of lead attached to the engine
mounts. OR move the wing further back during the building process.
Gordon Bowen
----- Original Message -----
From: Rcaprd@aol.com
To: pietenpol-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 9:29 PM
Subject: Re: Pietenpol-List: Stabilizer incidence
In a message dated 6/5/2005 2:56:37 PM Central Standard Time, lnawms@msn.com
writes:
Take a look at inflight photos of Piets and notice that many of them have
a drooping elevator! I know mine does and I have seen some others in the Brodhead
pattern that do also.
Hi Larry !! Good to hear from you.
My plane fly's straight level flight, with the elevator (flippers) slightly
low. I noticed this same thing in one of the pictures that Corky sent me
of his first plane (NX41CC) in flight. I can turn around and watch, and if I
pull back on the stick to make the flippers in line with the stab, it pitches
up to a very nose up attitude. This is kind of baffling. It's one of the reasons
I installed trim tabs on the flippers, and took ALL the negative incidence
out of the stab. I think the weight of the flippers being behind the hinge
(no mass balance) is at least some of the reason for it. It still fly's straight
& level with the drooping flippers, though. It's in trim at 1850 to 1900
rpm indicated, but my tach reads 100 rpm to low, compared to an electronic hand
held tach. If I add 100 rpm she climbs, and if I pull 100 rpm out, she descends
and picks up speed.
Those early planes, like the Bleriot Monoplane, are the only planes I know
of with an undercambered stabilizer. It seems they carry a portion of the
weight with the stab, so the C of G can be farther aft and it would also be much
more induced drag than later designs. Just think what would happen if the
stab would stall...the nose will pitch up abruptly past the Critical Angle of
Attack, and stall the main wing.
Chuck G.
It was an absolutely beautiful evening to fly. Clear blue sky, light south
wind, mid 80's. I did the River Run, then over an hour of slow flight at about
50 mph, with the power pulled back to 1700 rpm indicated, then did a Smokin'
Fly By at Beech Field. It's amazing how just put put putting around the sky
can clear all the cob webs out of my brain !!
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: Cruise speed... |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: "walt evans" <wbeevans@verizon.net>
Steve,
I had posted my speeds after adding dihedral to the wings. ( that probably
didn't affect speed though) . At full throttle with an A65 and a sensinech
prop of 72x42, I indicated well over 90. But checking with a GPS in four
directions the actual was 86/87.
Try nosing down slightly to get the wing up on step ( that's what I call it)
You'll seem like you are in a gentle dive, but you'll actually not loose
altitude.
Also I find that even in straight and level flight, a slight touch on the
right rudder will give you a few more knots
walt evans
NX140DL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Ruse" <steve@wotelectronics.com>
Subject: Pietenpol-List: Cruise speed...
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Steve Ruse
<steve@wotelectronics.com>
>
> The more reading I do, the more I see GN-1s and Pietenpols with claimed
cruise
> speeds of 70, 80, & 90+ MPH. My GN-1 with an A-75 cruises at about 65mph
at
> 2,200 RPM. Going to 2,400 or so will net me maybe an additional 5mph.
Nowhere
> near the 80+ MPH I see some people claiming. Now I understand I'm in a
> Pietenpol, and getting somewhere fast is not a concern, but I'm wondering
if
> other people's numbers are real, or if the prop (or some other factor) is
> making my plane slow.
>
> The prop on my plane is a fancy Prince "Q-tip" composite/wood prop, I
don't know
> the exact numbers, but I am trying to get them from Prince. The previous
owner
> told me this is a climb prop, and the plane came with an extra prop that
he
> said was more of a cruise prop, and would give maybe 70mph.
>
> Is the prop I'm using possibly slowing me down? The plane is right at
600lbs,
> I'm only ~170lbs, and the airfoil is the original Pietenpol airfoil. I
see
> some people claiming 80-85mph in GN-1s with A-65s. The higher cruise RPM
of my
> A-75 should give me an advantage over them. What am I missing? Should I
> really expect to get 80+mph in cruise?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Steve Ruse
> N6383J - KFTW
>
>
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 |
|
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
Steve-- I'm running the same engine (65 Continental) as Walt Evans and the
same prop length and pitch
72"x42P and verified by opposing gps runs at 2150 rpm, I'm seeing 70-71 mph
cruise and about 85-87 mph
at full throttle. (where I had the throttle set when the Fisk controller
near Oshkosh said "black and white high wing,
keep up your speed.")
Mike C.
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 |
|
FILETIME=[184E1760:01C56C58]
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: harvey.rule@bell.ca
Does anybody know what prop you would use for an 80hp Franklin(wood
prop)?At this time I am using a metal prop and it has been suggested to
me to switch to a wood prop to save the engine in case of a tip
forward.I am no where near flying situation as yet.I finished putting
the tail back together and I have yet to install the wings.It needs carb
heat,seat belts,jury struts,controls moved to the left side and a few
other alligators which havn't shown their ugly head as yet.I'm looking
forward to assembling it and finishing her off.She is a real beauty and
when I'm finished I'll post some pictures.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-pietenpol-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Michael
D Cuy
Subject: Pietenpol-List: cruise speeds
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy
<Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
Steve-- I'm running the same engine (65 Continental) as Walt Evans and
the
same prop length and pitch
72"x42P and verified by opposing gps runs at 2150 rpm, I'm seeing 70-71
mph
cruise and about 85-87 mph
at full throttle. (where I had the throttle set when the Fisk
controller
near Oshkosh said "black and white high wing,
keep up your speed.")
Mike C.
Message 16
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: cruise speeds |
--> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Steve Ruse <steve@wotelectronics.com>
Thanks Mike,
At what RPM do you cruise? How long are your take-off rolls, and what do you
climb at (FPM)? Also, what static RPM do you normally see?
Thanks!
Steve
Quoting Michael D Cuy <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>:
> --> Pietenpol-List message posted by: Michael D Cuy
> <Michael.D.Cuy@grc.nasa.gov>
>
> Steve-- I'm running the same engine (65 Continental) as Walt Evans and the
> same prop length and pitch
> 72"x42P and verified by opposing gps runs at 2150 rpm, I'm seeing 70-71 mph
> cruise and about 85-87 mph
> at full throttle. (where I had the throttle set when the Fisk controller
> near Oshkosh said "black and white high wing,
> keep up your speed.")
>
> Mike C.
Message 17
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: Cruise speed... |
In a message dated 6/8/2005 8:52:45 AM Central Standard Time,
jphillip@alarismed.com writes:
That's about what I see with mine. 65 - 70 mph with a 65 Continental
and a Sensenich 72 x 42 prop. A lot depends on your airspeed indicator,
and whether or not you have a real static port or just leave the
instruments open to ambient in the cockpit. Try to check your speed by
timing it both ways over a known distance, or use a GPS.
Steve,
I have a similar set up as Jack, but mine is a short fuselage, with similar
performance. After adding the fairings to the gear legs, and jury struts, the
speed increased only slightly...a couple of mph. Another way I like to check
airspeed, is to fly the same speed as traffic on the turnpike. The speed
limit is 70, so I figure traffic is going to be between 70 and 75. I like to try
to keep the shadow of my plane, right on the pavement just ahead of, and
keeping track with a chosen vehicle. It's a lot more difficult than you would
think, and I often wonder what is going through the driver's mind, when he / she
sees a big shadow on the road up ahead !!
Chuck G.
NX770CG
Message 18
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 |
|
d="scan'208,217"; a="999772173:sNHT306070736"
Subject: | Re: Cruise speed... |
----- Original Message -----
From: Rcaprd@aol.com
[snip]
I often wonder what is going through the driver's mind, when he / she sees a
big shadow on the road up ahead !!
Someone I won't name was flying an Aeronca Champ over oil country in Califonia,
trying to keep the shadow on an oil tanker. On a whim, out on a private, paved,
oil company haul road, "someone" did a touch and go in front of the tanker,
leaving the wheels on the road for several hundred feet. "Someone" then flew
straight away, hoping the driver didn't get a look at the 3" N-numbers. "Someone"
wonders, every now and then, if that driver still tells the story in some
bar in Kern county.
Message 19
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: Re: Cruise Speed |
Now don't paint all ground adjustable props with the same brush. At our field
there are many small continentals and Lycomings up to 0-320 using Warp Drives
and no one has had any problems.
There has been a report that I've seen about a Rotax 912S about hub cracking.
The Rotax 912S has high compression and I don't believe it was the 'HP' hub.
The Warp drive with the 'HP' hub is a solid very nicely machined item. I won't
comment on other ground adjustable props. Only that I am very happy with the
Warp Drive and have a 2-blade for the Pietenpol (hand propping...a must) and
a 3-blade for my Skyhopper 2.
I haven't mentioned the take off roll in the previous post because I've never
really measured it. Its fairly short, and of course is slightly extended with
a full fuel load or carrying passengers. On a smooth grass runway (home field)
or a paved strip. It's kind of fun to do a sprayplane style T/O and hold the
stick forward to build up speed. When the stick is pulled back at climb speed
it really hops off and climbs.
I have the A-65 powered Piet set up for 2250-2275 static. She will go to about
2375 flat out, so I commonly throttle back for economy. Again this provided
76 mph at 2250-2275 rpm.
When I had the Piet on floats. I pitched the prop for 2425 static. It would
go up to 2525 in level flight. Throttling just a wee bit back to about 2350 gave
me 72 mph. I left the prop in this position for 1 flight after returning the
Piet to wheels. It was the same top speed 72 mph at the same rpm. But did it
climb. Surprised the %&$# out of me. I have found that the current static pitch
provided a good balance of climb and speed for me.
Shawn Wolk
C-FRAZ Pietenpol Aircamper
C-GZOT Skyhopper 2
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! --
|