Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:47 AM - Re: Looking for Lycoming parts on-line (KellyM)
2. 05:50 AM - Re: glueing canopy (Bob Perkinson)
3. 05:57 AM - Glueing canopy (Glen Matejcek)
4. 06:09 AM - O-360/CS full power fuel flow (czechsix@juno.com)
5. 06:31 AM - Re: O-360/CS full power fuel flow (DOUGPFLYRV@aol.com)
6. 07:15 AM - Re: O-360/CS full power fuel flow (Tracy Crook)
7. 07:23 AM - Re: O-360/CS full power fuel flow (scott bilinski)
8. 07:47 AM - Lycoming F1A6 (Jeff Dowling)
9. 07:47 AM - Re: Typo - WW 200RV Prop RPM Restriction? (Ted Lumpkin)
10. 07:48 AM - Re: O-360/CS full power fuel flow (Vanremog@aol.com)
11. 07:55 AM - Re: O-360/CS full power fuel flow (Kevin Horton)
12. 08:04 AM - Re: O-360/CS full power fuel flow (scott bilinski)
13. 08:52 AM - Re: WW 200RV Prop RPM Restriction? Hartzell WW MT ()
14. 08:52 AM - Re: O-360/CS full power fuel flow (Randy Lervold)
15. 08:52 AM - Re: Lycoming F1A6 (John Danielson)
16. 08:58 AM - Re: Typo - WW 200RV Prop RPM Restriction? (Dan Beadle)
17. 08:58 AM - Re: O-360/CS full power fuel flow (Dan Beadle)
18. 08:59 AM - Re: RV fuel per hour and heat (Low power cruise) ()
19. 09:16 AM - Re: Varnatherm (Dale Ensing)
20. 09:30 AM - Governor for Whirlwind Prop (Charlie Brame)
21. 09:40 AM - Re: Varnatherm (BPA)
22. 09:42 AM - Hartzell WW MT - my MT comments (Ralph E. Capen)
23. 09:43 AM - Re: O-360/CS full power fuel flow (Kelly McMullen)
24. 09:55 AM - Re: Re: RV fuel per hour and heat (Low power cruise) (Ron Lee)
25. 10:45 AM - Re: Re: RV fuel per hour and heat (Low power cruise) (Ed Holyoke)
26. 11:48 AM - Re: O-360/CS full power fuel flow (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta))
27. 12:14 PM - Re: Governor for Whirlwind Prop (Randy Lervold)
28. 12:40 PM - Re: Looking for Lycoming parts on-line (RV6 Flyer) ()
29. 01:17 PM - Re: gluing canopy (Glaeser, Dennis A)
30. 01:51 PM - Re: Re: gluing canopy (Gerry Filby)
31. 01:54 PM - Re: Governor for Whirlwind Prop (LessDragProd@aol.com)
32. 02:22 PM - Re: Governor for Whirlwind Prop (Randy Lervold)
33. 03:47 PM - Re: Varnatherm (13brv3)
34. 05:05 PM - Re: Re: Varnatherm (linn Walters)
35. 05:21 PM - Re: Re: VErnatherm (SteinAir, Inc.)
36. 06:28 PM - Re: O-360/CS full power fuel flow (Alex Peterson)
37. 06:41 PM - Re: Re: WW 200RV Prop RPM Restriction? Hartzell WW MT (MLWynn@aol.com)
38. 09:41 PM - Vernatherm (Jeff Dowling)
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: | Re: Looking for Lycoming parts on-line |
--> RV-List message posted by: KellyM <kellym@aviating.com>
In addition to Sac Sky Ranch
www.aircraft-specialties.com
www.premiumaircraftparts.com
Vanremog@aol.com wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Vanremog@aol.com
>
>
> In a message dated 2/8/2006 8:25:30 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
> rv6_flyer@hotmail.com writes:
>
> Where can one buy Lycoming Parts on line? Did a Google search and not much
> luck finding an outfit that can cross-reference old part numbers to new and
> has a web site that you can order from.
>
> I
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Bob Perkinson" <bobperk@bellsouth.net>
Are you talking about installing the canopy in one piece then cutting the
wind screen loose from the sliding section? If I understand the process you
are describing it sound reasonable. But this is coming from someone that
has not gotten to this point in the building process.
Bob Perkinson
Hendersonville, TN.
RV9 N658RP Reserved
If nothing changes
Nothing changes
Hey Mickey, Charlie, Barefoot Billy et al-
After a bunch of setbacks, interruptions, sidetrack, and minor crises, I'm
finally back at it with my -8. Today I cut my (new Todd's) canopy to fit
the fuselage. I've read about all I can find on the glued canopy subject.
Standing back and admiring how much the project looks like a plane when the
canopy is in place, I had an idea. Suppose I were to put a few dabs of
SikaFlex on the roll bar and canopy bow, carefully set the canopy in place
with adequate and competent help, and then add dabs of glue around the
periphery of the canopy once it was clamped to the spacers. Once it was
cured, I could cut the canopy from the windscreen and go to work on the
full-up glue job and filleting. What do you guys think? Am I missing
something here, or wouldn't this approach simplify the whole rigging aspect
of independently gluing separate pieces of plastic to separate structures
and hoping that they line up well?
Glen Matejcek
aerobubba@earthlink.net
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
Hi All-
I've got to stop working so late into the evening- re-reading the
available canopy gluing articles this morning, I realized that my
brainstorm last night is exactly what 'Barefoot Billy' did. DUH! Ah, well-
If you're going to say something embarrassing, you might as well do it in
front of a few thousand of your friends...
Definitely, DO NOT ARCHIVE!
Glen Matejcek
aerobubba@earthlink.net
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: | O-360/CS full power fuel flow |
--> RV-List message posted by: "czechsix@juno.com" <czechsix@juno.com>
Guys,
For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel flowmeter.....can anybody
tell me what fuel flow they see at full takeoff power / 2700 rpm / mixture
rich? The Lycoming manual shows about 15 gph at full power, but the engine break-in
documentation that came from Aerosport Power shows something like 22 gph
at max power. That's a pretty big discrepancy. Curious if anybody can verify
one number or the other...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D, FAA inspection tomorrow with first flight as soon as the wx cooperates....
Guys,
For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel flowmeter.....can anybody
tell me what fuel flow they see at full takeoff power / 2700 rpm / mixture
rich? The Lycoming manual shows about 15 gph at full power, but the engine break-in
documentation that came from Aerosport Power shows something like 22 gph
at max power. That's a pretty big discrepancy. Curious if anybody can verify
one number or the other...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D, FAA inspection tomorrow with first flight as soon as the wx cooperates....
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: O-360/CS full power fuel flow |
--> RV-List message posted by: DOUGPFLYRV@aol.com
The last time I noticed I was burning about 20 GPH on take off.
Doug Preston
RV-7
DO NOT ARCHIVE
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: O-360/CS full power fuel flow |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Tracy Crook" <lors01@msn.com>
I like to keep records on these numbers myself. EAA published an extensive test
(including fuel flow numbers) on different exhaust systems and the test horse
was the IO - 360. The max power fuel flow was always in the neighborhood of
20 - 21 GPH. The 180 HP O - 360 would burn proportionally less (about 18 - 19
GPH at max power) but 15 GPH at 180 HP is somewhat optimistic I think. Running
the engine rich during break-in would easily put it in the 22 GPH area.
My Mazda rotary makes about 200 HP at 7000 rpm and burns about 20 GPH. What a
coincidence!
The BSFC of most any piston (or rotary) engine improves when tested at less than
max power. It takes less than half the fuel to make half the HP, especially
when leaning the mixture aggressively.
Tracy Crook
----- Original Message -----
From: czechsix@juno.com<mailto:czechsix@juno.com>
To: rv-list@matronics.com<mailto:rv-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 9:06 AM
Subject: RV-List: O-360/CS full power fuel flow
--> RV-List message posted by: "czechsix@juno.com<mailto:czechsix@juno.com>" <czechsix@juno.com<mailto:czechsix@juno.com>>
Guys,
For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel flowmeter.....can anybody
tell me what fuel flow they see at full takeoff power / 2700 rpm / mixture
rich? The Lycoming manual shows about 15 gph at full power, but the engine
break-in documentation that came from Aerosport Power shows something like 22
gph at max power. That's a pretty big discrepancy. Curious if anybody can verify
one number or the other...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D, FAA inspection tomorrow with first flight as soon as the wx cooperates....
Guys,
For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel flowmeter.....can anybody
tell me what fuel flow they see at full takeoff power / 2700 rpm / mixture
rich? The Lycoming manual shows about 15 gph at full power, but the engine break-in
documentation that came from Aerosport Power shows something like 22 gph
at max power. That's a pretty big discrepancy. Curious if anybody can verify
one number or the other...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D, FAA inspection tomorrow with first flight as soon as the wx cooperates....
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: O-360/CS full power fuel flow |
--> RV-List message posted by: scott bilinski <rv8a2001@yahoo.com>
On a 180 HP engine that is too much according to Mahlon on the Lycoming list. Matter
of fact I would ask this question on the Lycoming list. If I remember correctly
a 180 hp engine is approx 15~17, a 200 hp enigne is about approx 18~20.
I have a modifed engine which puts out 190~195 hp and I see 18.7~19.3. OAT can
make a good .5 GPH differnece.
DOUGPFLYRV@aol.com wrote: --> RV-List message posted by: DOUGPFLYRV@aol.com
The last time I noticed I was burning about 20 GPH on take off.
Doug Preston
RV-7
DO NOT ARCHIVE
Scott Bilinski
RV-8a
cell 858-395-5094
---------------------------------
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling2@earthlink.net>
Does anyone have a Lycoming F1A6?
do not archive
Shemp/Jeff Dowling
RV-6A, N915JD
265 hours
Chicago/Louisville
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill VonDane" <bill@vondane.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 12:15 AM
Subject: RV-List: EIS Settings / Pages
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Bill VonDane" <bill@vondane.com>
>
> Speaking of engine monitors... I have been doing some tweaking on my EIS
> and have created a spreadsheet I use for figuring out the settings and
> getting down on paper before transferring them to the EIS and have put a
> copy on my web site if anyone wants to download it:
> http://www.rv8a.com/downloads/
>
> Anyway, I am interested in how people have their EIS configured,
> specifically;
>
> What are you displaying on your custom pages?
> What limits do you have set?
>
> Moreover, What limits do you have set for:
> MAX EGT SPAN
> MAX EGT INC
> MAX EGT DEC
> MAX C RATE
>
> Thanks!
> -Bill VonDane
> RV-8A - Colorado Springs
> www.rv8a.com
> www.creativair.com
> www.epanelbuilder.com
>
>
>
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: Typo - WW 200RV Prop RPM Restriction? |
--> RV-List message posted by: Ted Lumpkin <tlump51@sbcglobal.net>
Whirlwindaviation.com
Ted
Jerry Grimmonpre <jerry@mc.net> wrote:
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jerry Grimmonpre"
Hi All ...
I've been reading your comments about Whirlwind and have been interested in
one for my IO-360-A1A. I've lost the Whirlwind site address and can't find
it with just the name Whirlwind in Google. I think they have change owners
or something.
Can anyone help with their addy?
Many thanks ...
Jerry Grimmonpre'
RV8A
DO NOT ARCHIVE
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Lumpkin"
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 7:33 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Typo - WW 200RV Prop RPM Restriction?
> --> RV-List message posted by: Ted Lumpkin
>
> Thanks for all your input on this issue. I made a typo in my original
> post. The WW 200RV recommended restriction is 2050 - 2300, not 2250 -
> 2300. I'm flying with a Hartzell now so I can fly around the restriction,
> I just would feel more comfortable not having to.
> In the specs section on the WW website it clearly states, "restrictions:
> none". It's a little disappointing to read that then have the rep tell
> you the owners manual states otherwise.
>
> Ted
>
> Ted Lumpkin wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Ted Lumpkin
>
> I am considering purchasing a Whirlwind 200RV prop to replace my Hartzell
> on an IO360. I am looking for a weight reduction and elimination of the
> 2000 - 2250 RPM restriction. I talked to Whirlwind today and the rep
> mentioned that the prop designer "recommends" avoiding 2250 - 2300 RPM and
> this is identified in the owner's manual.
> Those of you using this prop, how are you handling this recommendation?
>
> Thanks
>
> Ted
> Flying RV4
>
>
>
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: O-360/CS full power fuel flow |
--> RV-List message posted by: Vanremog@aol.com
In a message dated 2/9/2006 6:11:28 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
czechsix@juno.com writes:
For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel flowmeter.....can
anybody tell me what fuel flow they see at full takeoff power / 2700 rpm /
mixture rich? The Lycoming manual shows about 15 gph at full power
=======================================================
15-16 gph is what I see routinely at take off at my field on my 0-360 c/s
WFO at 400 ft MSL. 8.2-8.4 gph is what I see leaned out at 65%.
GV (RV-6A N1GV O-360-A1A, C/S, Flying 774hrs, Silicon Valley, CA)
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: | Re: O-360/CS full power fuel flow |
--> RV-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
On 9 Feb 2006, at 14:06, czechsix@juno.com wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: "czechsix@juno.com" <czechsix@juno.com>
>
> Guys,
> For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel
> flowmeter.....can anybody tell me what fuel flow they see at full
> takeoff power / 2700 rpm / mixture rich? The Lycoming manual shows
> about 15 gph at full power, but the engine break-in documentation
> that came from Aerosport Power shows something like 22 gph at max
> power. That's a pretty big discrepancy. Curious if anybody can
> verify one number or the other...
Mark,
If you are looking at Figure 3-34 in the Lycoming Operator's Manual,
it is labelled "Minimum Allowable Fuel Flow". There is nothing wrong
with having a higher fuel flow than that, as long as the engine runs
smoothly.
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
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: O-360/CS full power fuel flow |
--> RV-List message posted by: scott bilinski <rv8a2001@yahoo.com>
The numbers I gave are from memory from about a year ago, they were posted by Mahlon
from Mattituc. Maybe I am off a gallon on the low side but I think close.
Again you want real answers from someone who has run hundreds of engines on
the dyno, then post this question on the Lycoming list and Mahlon will answer
it with real numbers.
Tracy Crook <lors01@msn.com> wrote: --> RV-List message posted by: "Tracy Crook"
I like to keep records on these numbers myself. EAA published an extensive test
(including fuel flow numbers) on different exhaust systems and the test horse
was the IO - 360. The max power fuel flow was always in the neighborhood of 20
- 21 GPH. The 180 HP O - 360 would burn proportionally less (about 18 - 19 GPH
at max power) but 15 GPH at 180 HP is somewhat optimistic I think. Running
the engine rich during break-in would easily put it in the 22 GPH area.
My Mazda rotary makes about 200 HP at 7000 rpm and burns about 20 GPH. What a coincidence!
The BSFC of most any piston (or rotary) engine improves when tested at less than
max power. It takes less than half the fuel to make half the HP, especially
when leaning the mixture aggressively.
Tracy Crook
----- Original Message -----
From: czechsix@juno.com
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 9:06 AM
Subject: RV-List: O-360/CS full power fuel flow
--> RV-List message posted by: "czechsix@juno.com" >
Guys,
For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel flowmeter.....can anybody
tell me what fuel flow they see at full takeoff power / 2700 rpm / mixture
rich? The Lycoming manual shows about 15 gph at full power, but the engine break-in
documentation that came from Aerosport Power shows something like 22 gph
at max power. That's a pretty big discrepancy. Curious if anybody can verify
one number or the other...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D, FAA inspection tomorrow with first flight as soon as the wx cooperates....
Guys,
For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel flowmeter.....can anybody
tell me what fuel flow they see at full takeoff power / 2700 rpm / mixture
rich? The Lycoming manual shows about 15 gph at full power, but the engine break-in
documentation that came from Aerosport Power shows something like 22 gph
at max power. That's a pretty big discrepancy. Curious if anybody can verify
one number or the other...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D, FAA inspection tomorrow with first flight as soon as the wx cooperates....
Scott Bilinski
RV-8a
cell 858-395-5094
---------------------------------
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: WW 200RV Prop RPM Restriction? Hartzell WW MT |
--> RV-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
First I'll say I the Hartzell Blended Airfoil is the best value and the
fastest constant speed prop you can put on. I think WW and MT
make good products and will be lighter than the Hartzell. MT claims
no restriction but they are VERY vague about it. I have seen nothing
in writing or that they have tested it on modified engines. However
with a wood core blade I suspect that they are OK at least with a
stock engine since wood is such a good dampener.
Alex you are right the stress level for Al fatigue damage can be lower
than steel, but steel can be horrible, depending on type of steel and
heat treat.
Yes fatigue life is not really infinite for an aluminum prop, but I meant
it's so long that for practical service it represents such a long
calendar period it is considered infinite. Large jets are good for 20
years of economical service with 24/7 severe service with a factor of
2, or 40 years. Boeing's stand is with proper maintenance and
inspection an airframe can go forever. However the FAA and aging
fleet initiative makes inspections so expensive and intrusive (x-ray,
eddy current, ultra sound and mass dis assembly) that it becomes too
expensive to continue to fly it commercial. However a used B707 is
built like a tank, and if only operated with low use private purposes
makes an awesome large business Jet (John Travolta). These B707
are over 40 year old and built for stout. The freight companies are
thrashing 40 year old DCV-8's nightly. They just keep replacing
parts. On the other hand an old fire bomber (C130A) lost a wing and
recently in the news the Chalks Airlines Grumman lost a wing,
which is a dramatic and tragic reminder of what metal fatigue is.
In the past people modified metal props off of slow factory planes for
their fast homebuilt. They would cut them down, re-pitch them. The
vibratory stresses where so great that they broke in a few 100 hours
(I think at the 2/3 span).
Alex, yes I do think the interaction of crank and prop vibration is the
issue, but it's a prop restriction not a crank restriction. If Lycoming
wanted a life limited crank they could save some lbs, but they have
such an overbuilt piece of steel that stresses are below that critical
level, where damage is nil. As it's now you can rebuild a Lycoming
almost infinitely. They mandatory replacement parts are the highly
loaded rod nuts and studs, for example. However you can weld up a
7000 hr cracked cylinder or use a 10,000 crank and go fly.
They have S-N charts, stress-cycle charts. Higher the stress the less
the cycles. Makes sense. Than there is stress concentration (sharp
corners) and how the stress cycles, such as is it from zero to positive
or tension-compression and back, which does far grater damage. If
you keep a part in compression you can improve the fatigue life. I
made a living doing fatigue life analysis on large aluminum transport
jet airframes. I can tell you a sharp nick on a prop is critical. The prop
mid to tip area is critical, where the cross section is thinner. The root
has details that are critical, where the fillet radiuses are in the mount
flange area in the hub. To counter act stress they add material (lower
stress), use good details (smooth surfaces, big radius lower stress
concentration) and treat the material to shoot penning in some cases
to add residual compression to the material.
My point is props are designed for a very very long fatigue life time.
Although not really infinite, it's so long, for all practical purposes the
prop will be dimensionally and physically worn down or is scrap for
other reasons, like corrosion, before the fatigue life is reached. When
you bring your Hartzell in and the P-shop says you are .001 under
the min thickness at the second station from the tip, you are cooked.
I have one of those "scraped" props on my RV. I called and the
reason they specify a min dimension is not fatigue or stress but just a
somewhat arbitrary dimension as a cutoff based more on loss of
performance than fatigue. Some big props that start life at 6 inch
chord can be trimmed down to say 5 inches they just say that is
enough for performance reasons. Some times they do find cracks;
micro cracks that if left could cause a failure. That is why there is
limited time between overhauls recommend. Crack growth rate is
another part of fatigue analysis. You assume a crack and calculate if
it will grow to be critical before the next inspection cycle. The time
limited aspect is for corrosion, which is the killer of most old props
left out in the weather.
Hartzell has recognized after a period of time some parts of
old designs where not unlimited life and need to be restricted, thus
the dreaded AD. In the past they made hubs and clamps with steel.
We are talking 1940's, 50's design that have not been made in a 1/2
century. They have limited life, repeated inspections and some
stress relieving process that must be done every overhaul (which
period is now shorter), such a shot penning. Shot penning puts a
residual compressive stress in the outer surface which can help
fatigue life.
The compact hub like the HC-C2YK and the later BA airfoil are
derivatives of a design that has millions of hours and been improved
since the 60's. Even a HC-C2YK has been improved and a new
Hartzell with the same part number is nothing like the one make in
1969. They continually improve them so it's a mature design and well
tested. That is why you find the NEW BA airfoil has NO RPM
restrictions!
"SUPERIOR XP-360 RESTRICTIONS:
Hartzell Propeller Model HC-C2YR-1BFP/F7496 (BA prop) is
vibrationally approved when mounted on Superior Air Parts model O-
360-B1A2 and IO-360-B1A2 engines rated at 180HP at 2700 RPM
with magneto ignition and installed in Van's Model RV-6A and similar
single engine tractor aircraft. There are no operating restrictions."
http://www.hartzellprop.com/kitplane/index_kitplane.htm
With HC pistons, EI and FADEC there are restrictions but they single
power point restriction (one MP/RPM) for the new Hartzell BA prop,
but they are not a range of RPM's as with the classic HC-
C2YK/F7666.
George
From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@earthlink.net>
George,
Good post regarding the prop restrictions. A couple additional
thoughts: Regarding fatigue life, what you said is true for alloys of
steel, but
not for aluminum. Even at low stresses, the fatigue life is not
practically infinite.
Alex Peterson RV6-A N66AP 712 hours
Maple Grove, MN
From: Ron Lee <ronlee@pcisys.net>
Supposedly MT makes a prop without an RPM restriction.
Ron Lee
---------------------------------
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: O-360/CS full power fuel flow |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" <randy@romeolima.com>
> For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel flowmeter.....can
> anybody tell me what fuel flow they see at full takeoff power / 2700 rpm /
> mixture rich? The Lycoming manual shows about 15 gph at full power, but
> the engine break-in documentation that came from Aerosport Power shows
> something like 22 gph at max power.
16-17 gph for mine. Almost always read 16.5 when taking off from near sea
level. I would imagine jetting could change this figure when running at full
rich mixture. If someone is burning 19-20 gph their main jets may be too
large.
Randy Lervold
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "John Danielson" <johnd@wlcwyo.com>
Yes I put an F1A6 in my RV-6. I changed the oil sump to an A1A and
everything was cool.
Nice thing about the F1A6 is the counterbalanced crankshaft and no RPM
restrictions.
John L. Danielson
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Dowling
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 8:45 AM
Subject: RV-List: Lycoming F1A6
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling"
<shempdowling2@earthlink.net>
Does anyone have a Lycoming F1A6?
do not archive
Shemp/Jeff Dowling
RV-6A, N915JD
265 hours
Chicago/Louisville
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill VonDane" <bill@vondane.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 12:15 AM
Subject: RV-List: EIS Settings / Pages
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Bill VonDane" <bill@vondane.com>
>
> Speaking of engine monitors... I have been doing some tweaking on my
EIS
> and have created a spreadsheet I use for figuring out the settings and
> getting down on paper before transferring them to the EIS and have put
a
> copy on my web site if anyone wants to download it:
> http://www.rv8a.com/downloads/
>
> Anyway, I am interested in how people have their EIS configured,
> specifically;
>
> What are you displaying on your custom pages?
> What limits do you have set?
>
> Moreover, What limits do you have set for:
> MAX EGT SPAN
> MAX EGT INC
> MAX EGT DEC
> MAX C RATE
>
> Thanks!
> -Bill VonDane
> RV-8A - Colorado Springs
> www.rv8a.com
> www.creativair.com
> www.epanelbuilder.com
>
>
>
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: | Typo - WW 200RV Prop RPM Restriction? |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Beadle" <dan.beadle@inclinesoftworks.com>
http://www.whirlwindaviation.com/
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ted Lumpkin
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Typo - WW 200RV Prop RPM Restriction?
--> RV-List message posted by: Ted Lumpkin <tlump51@sbcglobal.net>
Whirlwindaviation.com
Ted
Jerry Grimmonpre <jerry@mc.net> wrote:
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jerry Grimmonpre"
Hi All ...
I've been reading your comments about Whirlwind and have been interested in
one for my IO-360-A1A. I've lost the Whirlwind site address and can't find
it with just the name Whirlwind in Google. I think they have change owners
or something.
Can anyone help with their addy?
Many thanks ...
Jerry Grimmonpre'
RV8A
DO NOT ARCHIVE
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Lumpkin"
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 7:33 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Typo - WW 200RV Prop RPM Restriction?
> --> RV-List message posted by: Ted Lumpkin
>
> Thanks for all your input on this issue. I made a typo in my original
> post. The WW 200RV recommended restriction is 2050 - 2300, not 2250 -
> 2300. I'm flying with a Hartzell now so I can fly around the restriction,
> I just would feel more comfortable not having to.
> In the specs section on the WW website it clearly states, "restrictions:
> none". It's a little disappointing to read that then have the rep tell
> you the owners manual states otherwise.
>
> Ted
>
> Ted Lumpkin wrote:
> --> RV-List message posted by: Ted Lumpkin
>
> I am considering purchasing a Whirlwind 200RV prop to replace my Hartzell
> on an IO360. I am looking for a weight reduction and elimination of the
> 2000 - 2250 RPM restriction. I talked to Whirlwind today and the rep
> mentioned that the prop designer "recommends" avoiding 2250 - 2300 RPM and
> this is identified in the owner's manual.
> Those of you using this prop, how are you handling this recommendation?
>
> Thanks
>
> Ted
> Flying RV4
>
>
>
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: | O-360/CS full power fuel flow |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dan Beadle" <dan.beadle@inclinesoftworks.com>
These numbers seem about right. Rule of thumb is about 10HP / Gallon when
at best power (100 degrees rich). Varies by engine type, but generally
within 10%
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of scott bilinski
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 8:03 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: O-360/CS full power fuel flow
--> RV-List message posted by: scott bilinski <rv8a2001@yahoo.com>
The numbers I gave are from memory from about a year ago, they were posted
by Mahlon from Mattituc. Maybe I am off a gallon on the low side but I think
close. Again you want real answers from someone who has run hundreds of
engines on the dyno, then post this question on the Lycoming list and Mahlon
will answer it with real numbers.
Tracy Crook <lors01@msn.com> wrote: --> RV-List message posted by: "Tracy
Crook"
I like to keep records on these numbers myself. EAA published an extensive
test (including fuel flow numbers) on different exhaust systems and the test
horse was the IO - 360. The max power fuel flow was always in the
neighborhood of 20 - 21 GPH. The 180 HP O - 360 would burn proportionally
less (about 18 - 19 GPH at max power) but 15 GPH at 180 HP is somewhat
optimistic I think. Running the engine rich during break-in would easily put
it in the 22 GPH area.
My Mazda rotary makes about 200 HP at 7000 rpm and burns about 20 GPH. What
a coincidence!
The BSFC of most any piston (or rotary) engine improves when tested at less
than max power. It takes less than half the fuel to make half the HP,
especially when leaning the mixture aggressively.
Tracy Crook
----- Original Message -----
From: czechsix@juno.com
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 9:06 AM
Subject: RV-List: O-360/CS full power fuel flow
--> RV-List message posted by: "czechsix@juno.com" >
Guys,
For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel flowmeter.....can
anybody tell me what fuel flow they see at full takeoff power / 2700 rpm /
mixture rich? The Lycoming manual shows about 15 gph at full power, but the
engine break-in documentation that came from Aerosport Power shows something
like 22 gph at max power. That's a pretty big discrepancy. Curious if
anybody can verify one number or the other...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D, FAA inspection tomorrow with first flight as soon as the wx
cooperates....
Guys,
For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel flowmeter.....can
anybody tell me what fuel flow they see at full takeoff power / 2700 rpm /
mixture rich? The Lycoming manual shows about 15 gph at full power, but the
engine break-in documentation that came from Aerosport Power shows something
like 22 gph at max power. That's a pretty big discrepancy. Curious if
anybody can verify one number or the other...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D, FAA inspection tomorrow with first flight as soon as the wx
cooperates....
Scott Bilinski
RV-8a
cell 858-395-5094
---------------------------------
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV fuel per hour and heat (Low power cruise) |
--> RV-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
As long as the engine is in normal limits as Lycoming recommends. Off the top of
my head 280 CHT, Oil Temp 190/180 min. There is not truth to doing damage as
long as you get it hot enough. Sure you need to check it makes full power, but
that happens every takeoff. I am not a fan of babying it on take-off but that
would be the next step in fuel saving. Do you need 2000 fpm climb?
Check Lycomings key reprints. They address this.
http://www.lycoming.textron.com/main.jsp?bodyPage=support/publications/keyReprints/operation/lowPowerLowRPM.html
Here is the other operational articles that has good info on power settings.
http://www.lycoming.textron.com/main.jsp?bodyPage=/support/publications/keyReprints/operation.html
So what do you all think about de-rated takeoffs? I guess if the runway is long
and there are no obstacles, but I tend to want to get as high as fast as possible.
ON the other hand a Cessna C150 is crawling up at 500 fpm all the time.
George
From: "Martin Hone" <mctrader@bigpond.net.au>
Hi Jerry,
I usually run my O-320 powered RV6 at 2250 rpm with a Sensenich 79"
prop and get great economy as well as good speed -
like around 6 US gals per hour at 135 kts.. I too have been told to be
aware of burning up the engine, most notably the exhaust valves, as
well as glazing the bores. I don't really see how, as my CHT's are all around
310-315 deg F, and the engine is producing approx 55% power. I know we
didn't build our RVs to go slow, but it is relative, and the fuel
savings are nice. Cheers Martin in Oz
---------------------------------
Brings words and photos together (easily) with
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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dale Ensing" <densing@carolina.rr.com>
The posting by linn Walters regarding operation of the Varatherm reminded me of
a recent experience with an initial run of a engine that I think is worth passing
along to the those who have not yet run their engines
.
When we did the first start of the engine on a rather cold day we saw no oil leaks
in the engine area. In a subsequent engine start, within a half hour, suddenly
there was oil leaking on the back side of the engine. After shutting it down
we discovered the leak was from the oil line returning the oil from the oil
cooler to the engine. It appears the oil leak only appeared after the Varatherm
opened and there was oil pressure in the return line. A oil pressure check
was made as soon as the engine was first started the first time so I don't think
it was the oil pressure finally coming up,
The point here is to be sure the engine gets sufficiently warm to open the Varatherm
when doing the leak testing on a new engine. Other wise there maybe a leak
you are not aware of when making that first flight.
Dale Ensing
RV-6A
EAA TC & FA
PS I would be interested in hearing from engine experts if my analysis is wrong.
Message 20
| 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: | Governor for Whirlwind Prop |
--> RV-List message posted by: Charlie Brame <chasb@satx.rr.com>
For you users of Whirlwind props, what governor are you using?
WW recommends the Jihostroj P920 which sells for approx $1,250. Van
sells the MT P860-4 governor (also made by Jihostroj) for $1050.
Will Van's MT governor work on a WW 150-151 prop which requires a
pressure of 450-475 PSI? Do MT props require the same high pressure to
operate?
Any fit problems with either governor?
Thanks,
Charlie Brame
RV-6A N11CB
San Antonio
Message 21
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "BPA" <BPA@BPAENGINES.COM>
You are correct Dale in that an oil line leak from the cooler would not
be found until the Vernatherm opens. The vernatherm is supposed to open
(53E22144)which is the current Lycoming vernatherm when oil temp reaches
187-189 F. Not to be alarmed but when the vernatherm opens there will be
a slight drop in pressure, usually 3-5 lbs.
Allen Barrett
BPE, Inc.
www.barrettprecisionengines.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dale Ensing
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Varnatherm
--> RV-List message posted by: "Dale Ensing" <densing@carolina.rr.com>
The posting by linn Walters regarding operation of the Varatherm
reminded me of a recent experience with an initial run of a engine that
I think is worth passing along to the those who have not yet run their
engines
.
When we did the first start of the engine on a rather cold day we saw no
oil leaks in the engine area. In a subsequent engine start, within a
half hour, suddenly there was oil leaking on the back side of the
engine. After shutting it down we discovered the leak was from the oil
line returning the oil from the oil cooler to the engine. It appears the
oil leak only appeared after the Varatherm opened and there was oil
pressure in the return line. A oil pressure check was made as soon as
the engine was first started the first time so I don't think it was the
oil pressure finally coming up,
The point here is to be sure the engine gets sufficiently warm to open
the Varatherm when doing the leak testing on a new engine. Other wise
there maybe a leak you are not aware of when making that first flight.
Dale Ensing
RV-6A
EAA TC & FA
PS I would be interested in hearing from engine experts if my analysis
is wrong.
Message 22
| 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: | Hartzell WW MT - my MT comments |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen@earthlink.net>
For my engine combination (their actual statement was O360 - 180 hp or greater),
MT recommended that I install the F6 counterweighted crankshaft (now going back
for AD) and they told me there were no limitations with this recommended combination.
I am using AFP injection, Lasar ignition, and 9.2 pistons in an Aerosport built
engine.
Ralph Capen
Message 23
| 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: O-360/CS full power fuel flow |
--> RV-List message posted by: Kelly McMullen <kellym@aviating.com>
A related question. Does anyone know if the standard certified
carburetor for the Lyc. O-360 has a power enrichment circuit(for full
throttle enrichement)?
If so, I would think that as soon as you reduced throttle 1/2 inch for
cruise the EGTs would rise noticeably. Can anyone confirm that?
Do not archive
Quoting scott bilinski <rv8a2001@yahoo.com>:
> --> RV-List message posted by: scott bilinski <rv8a2001@yahoo.com>
>
> The numbers I gave are from memory from about a year ago, they were
> posted by Mahlon from Mattituc. Maybe I am off a gallon on the low
> side but I think close. Again you want real answers from someone who
> has run hundreds of engines on the dyno, then post this question on
> the Lycoming list and Mahlon will answer it with real numbers.
>
Message 24
| 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: RV fuel per hour and heat (Low power cruise) |
--> RV-List message posted by: Ron Lee <ronlee@pcisys.net>
> Do you need 2000 fpm climb?
Why not? Your first article discussed ways to save fuel. One way
is to cut flying. I don't intend to fly 300 hours this year. But I will
cruise at normal speeds when I do. And I buy gas where it is
cheaper.
>
So what do you all think about de-rated takeoffs? I guess if the
runway is long and there are no obstacles, but I tend to want to get
as high as fast as possible.
I agree. Get up to cruising altitude. Full Throttle for a few minutes
is not going to cost that much gas. Personally, if you are worried
about that amount either sell the plane or cut back a few hours.
It is like buying a Yugo to save gas. Not me. I prefer large pieces
of metal around me when I drive and if I have to pay more for gas,
so be it. Safety is the higher priority.
Ron Lee
Message 25
| 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: RV fuel per hour and heat (Low power cruise) |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
> So what do you all think about de-rated takeoffs? I guess if the
runway is long and there are no obstacles, but I tend to want to get as
high as fast as possible. ON the other hand a Cessna C150 is crawling up
at 500 fpm all the time.
George
George,
De-rated takeoffs at low elevations are probably a bad idea because the
carburetor (and I think fuel injection systems also) run richer at full
throttle than when slightly retarded to increase the detonation margin.
You run the risk of operating too lean and closer to the detonation
margin when at higher than 75% power and low fuel flow. If you were to
use a power setting below 75%, perhaps that would be a non issue.
At higher altitude airports, your takeoff power is automatically
de-rated by lower air pressure and you may have to lean to achieve
maximum available power. Because you're operating below 75% at anything
above around 7500' density altitude (and normally aspirated), it's
harder to make it detonate by leaning.
I like the idea of maximum terrain clearance as soon as possible for
purposes of having more time in case of power failure. This calls for
full available power for takeoff and initial climb. Power can be reduced
when you feel you're high enough to have viable engine out options. YMMV
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
Message 26
| 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: | O-360/CS full power fuel flow |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
18 for me at sea level.
~17 at 1000'
do not archive
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
czechsix@juno.com
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 9:06 AM
Subject: RV-List: O-360/CS full power fuel flow
--> RV-List message posted by: "czechsix@juno.com" <czechsix@juno.com>
Guys,
For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel
flowmeter.....can anybody tell me what fuel flow they see at full
takeoff power / 2700 rpm / mixture rich? The Lycoming manual shows
about 15 gph at full power, but the engine break-in documentation that
came from Aerosport Power shows something like 22 gph at max power.
That's a pretty big discrepancy. Curious if anybody can verify one
number or the other...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D, FAA inspection tomorrow with first flight as soon as the wx
cooperates....
Guys,
For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel
flowmeter.....can anybody tell me what fuel flow they see at full
takeoff power / 2700 rpm / mixture rich? The Lycoming manual shows about
15 gph at full power, but the engine break-in documentation that came
from Aerosport Power shows something like 22 gph at max power. That's a
pretty big discrepancy. Curious if anybody can verify one number or the
other...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D, FAA inspection tomorrow with first flight as soon as the wx
cooperates....
Message 27
| 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: Governor for Whirlwind Prop |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" <randy@romeolima.com>
> WW recommends the Jihostroj P920 which sells for approx $1,250. Van
> sells the MT P860-4 governor (also made by Jihostroj) for $1050.
>
> Will Van's MT governor work on a WW 150-151 prop which requires a
> pressure of 450-475 PSI? Do MT props require the same high pressure to
> operate?
Due to a smaller piston in the hub the WW 150-151 require the governor
pressure to be in the 425 psi range rather than the 325-350 range. WW buys
the Jihostroj governors specially modified for the higher pressure,
therefore the MT version won't work for the WW 150-151.
Randy Lervold
Message 28
| 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: Looking for Lycoming parts on-line (RV6 Flyer) |
--> RV-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
ECI
http://www.eci2fly.com/
I think some one mentioned sacramento sky ranch already. G
---------------------------------
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
Message 29
| 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: gluing canopy |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Glaeser, Dennis A" <dennis.glaeser@eds.com>
One thing to be sure to do if you glue in multiple steps is to re-do the
prep steps each time, and be sure to apply the primer and glue within
the timeframes specified. I spoke to a builder who did a bunch of
testing on the glue joints. He tested parts where they waited much
longer than specified between priming and gluing, and the joint strength
definitely suffers. Done properly, he verified that the glue joint is
stronger than the Plexiglas, but he said following the instructions is
paramount.
Dennis Glaeser
7A Fuselage (lots of riveting to do before I get to glue :-)
Message 30
| 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: gluing canopy |
--> RV-List message posted by: Gerry Filby <gerf@gerf.com>
Thanks for posting that - its really useful knowledge.
g
do not archive
>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Glaeser, Dennis A"
> <dennis.glaeser@eds.com>
>
> One thing to be sure to do if you glue in multiple steps is to re-do the
> prep steps each time, and be sure to apply the primer and glue within
> the timeframes specified. I spoke to a builder who did a bunch of
> testing on the glue joints. He tested parts where they waited much
> longer than specified between priming and gluing, and the joint strength
> definitely suffers. Done properly, he verified that the glue joint is
> stronger than the Plexiglas, but he said following the instructions is
> paramount.
>
> Dennis Glaeser
> 7A Fuselage (lots of riveting to do before I get to glue :-)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf@gerf.com
Tel: 415 203 9177
Message 31
| 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: Governor for Whirlwind Prop |
--> RV-List message posted by: LessDragProd@aol.com
Are you saying that the modified Jihostroj P920 governor is the only
governor that operates the Whirlwind 150-151 propeller?
BTW, Jihostroj made the P-4xx series governor for MT Propeller.
The P-8xx series governor number became necessary to differentiate a newly
certified manufacturer for an identical performing governor.
Jim Ayers
In a message dated 02/09/2006 12:15:51 PM Pacific Standard Time,
randy@romeolima.com writes:
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" <randy@romeolima.com>
> WW recommends the Jihostroj P920 which sells for approx $1,250. Van
> sells the MT P860-4 governor (also made by Jihostroj) for $1050.
>
> Will Van's MT governor work on a WW 150-151 prop which requires a
> pressure of 450-475 PSI? Do MT props require the same high pressure to
> operate?
Due to a smaller piston in the hub the WW 150-151 require the governor
pressure to be in the 425 psi range rather than the 325-350 range. WW buys
the Jihostroj governors specially modified for the higher pressure,
therefore the MT version won't work for the WW 150-151.
Randy Lervold
Message 32
| 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: Governor for Whirlwind Prop |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Randy Lervold" <randy@romeolima.com>
> Are you saying that the modified Jihostroj P920 governor is the only
> governor that operates the Whirlwind 150-151 propeller?
Yes, as far as I know. Check with WW to be sure...
www.whirlwindaviation.com
Randy Lervold
Message 33
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "13brv3" <13brv3c@bellsouth.net>
I'm glad this came up, because I've never quite understood how this little gizmo
worked. Now that I think I understand it, I'm left with another puzzle.
Why do people go to the trouble to block off part of their oil cooler in the winter?
If this thermostat only opens when the temp is too high, then it will barely
be putting any oil through the cooler anyway.
Color me confused...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=11138#11138
Message 34
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
I believe that even with the vernatherm 'open' (returning oil to the
case), some oil still flows through the oil cooler due to pressure
differences. However, I think it'll just take longer for the engine to
get up to temp without the tape. It would be more efficient to block
off the air intake a little ..... but slapping duct tape over the inlets
would be a little unsightly. One other cold weather option would be to
hinge the lower cowl at the cooling air exhaust opening to control the
air flow that way. Just a thought.
Linn
do not archive
13brv3 wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "13brv3" <13brv3c@bellsouth.net>
>
>I'm glad this came up, because I've never quite understood how this little gizmo
worked. Now that I think I understand it, I'm left with another puzzle.
>
>Why do people go to the trouble to block off part of their oil cooler in the winter?
If this thermostat only opens when the temp is too high, then it will
barely be putting any oil through the cooler anyway.
>
>Color me confused...
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=11138#11138
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 35
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "SteinAir, Inc." <stein@steinair.com>
Well....some of us that live up in the great north not only have to close
off our oil coolers, but I also put Duct Tape over about 30% of my cowl
inlets.
I flew last weekend when it was only 12 degrees outside and to get the oil
temp above 120 I have to have the cooler not only blocked off, but taped on
the front and the cowl inlets also partially closed. Even then I barely got
it above 180.
Also, some of us have lyc's with no VERNATHERM (not only has this entire
thread been archived, but it's been archived with the incorrect
spelling....just wondering why nobody changed the subject line already)?!?!
Cheers,
Stein.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of 13brv3
>Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 5:43 PM
>To: rv-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Re: Varnatherm
>
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: "13brv3" <13brv3c@bellsouth.net>
>
>I'm glad this came up, because I've never quite understood how
>this little gizmo worked. Now that I think I understand it, I'm
>left with another puzzle.
>
>Why do people go to the trouble to block off part of their oil
>cooler in the winter? If this thermostat only opens when the temp
>is too high, then it will barely be putting any oil through the
>cooler anyway.
>
>Color me confused...
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=11138#11138
>
>
Message 36
| 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: | O-360/CS full power fuel flow |
--> RV-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@earthlink.net>
> --> RV-List message posted by: "czechsix@juno.com" <czechsix@juno.com>
>
> Guys,
> For those of you with a 180 HP O-360, CS prop, and fuel
> flowmeter.....can anybody tell me what fuel flow they see at
> full takeoff power / 2700 rpm / mixture rich? The Lycoming
> manual shows about 15 gph at full power, but the engine
> break-in documentation that came from Aerosport Power shows
> something like 22 gph at max power. That's a pretty big
> discrepancy. Curious if anybody can verify one number or the other...
> Thanks,
> --Mark Navratil
Mark, the 22 sounds quite high. Mine runs at about 16 or so at 1000msl, and
many others have reported similar results in past threads on this subject.
Don Rivera (designer of the Airflow Performance system) has indicated to me
that 17 or so is correct for a 180hp at sea level (I'll have to note the
flow next time I'm at sea level, which will be Sun-n-Fun in April).
There are some extremely good articles about engine management written by
John Deakin on www.avweb.com. They are not necessarily easy reading, so
plan on spending some serious time studying them.
The one number I've not been able to directly find yet is the specific fuel
consumption desired for a full throttle sea level condition. Clearly, at
this full rich setting, excess fuel is desired to modify the combustion to
eliminate detonation and to run cooler. My 16 gph at 1000msl would work out
to be about .57 lb/hp/hr (sfc, specific fuel consumption). Best power is
around .51, while best economy is around .4. 22gph would be .73 lb/hp/hr.
Does anyone know the desired sfc for full throttle, sea level power?
Alex Peterson
RV6-A N66AP 712 hours
Maple Grove, MN
Message 37
| 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: WW 200RV Prop RPM Restriction? Hartzell WW MT |
--> RV-List message posted by: MLWynn@aol.com
Thanks, George
That was both helpful and educational.
Regards,
Michael Wynn
RV 8 Wings
San Ramon
Do Not Archive
Message 38
| 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 |
|
--> RV-List message posted by: "Jeff Dowling" <shempdowling2@earthlink.net>
Ive asked this several times with no responses. I see it like you. There
should be no reason to cover your oil cooler if you have a vernatherm.
Shemp/Jeff Dowling
RV-6A, N915JD
265 hours
Chicago/Louisville
----- Original Message -----
From: "linn Walters" <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 10:00 PM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Varnatherm
> --> RV-List message posted by: linn Walters <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
>
> I believe that even with the vernatherm 'open' (returning oil to the
> case), some oil still flows through the oil cooler due to pressure
> differences. However, I think it'll just take longer for the engine to
> get up to temp without the tape. It would be more efficient to block
> off the air intake a little ..... but slapping duct tape over the inlets
> would be a little unsightly. One other cold weather option would be to
> hinge the lower cowl at the cooling air exhaust opening to control the
> air flow that way. Just a thought.
> Linn
>
> do not archive
> 13brv3 wrote:
>
>>--> RV-List message posted by: "13brv3" <13brv3c@bellsouth.net>
>>
>>I'm glad this came up, because I've never quite understood how this little
>>gizmo worked. Now that I think I understand it, I'm left with another
>>puzzle.
>>
>>Why do people go to the trouble to block off part of their oil cooler in
>>the winter? If this thermostat only opens when the temp is too high, then
>>it will barely be putting any oil through the cooler anyway.
>>
>>Color me confused...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Read this topic online here:
>>
>>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=11138#11138
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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! --
|