Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:45 AM - Re: 0-235 IN A W-8 (Boud Kuenen)
2. 07:16 AM - Re: 0-235 IN A W-8 (David Magaw)
3. 08:02 AM - Re: Re:O&O speed? (mlinda@wt.net)
4. 10:06 AM - Re: Tailwind speed? (Fred Weaver)
5. 10:15 AM - Re: Tailwind W-8 speed (Fred Weaver)
6. 04:15 PM - Re: Re:O&O speed? (Earl Luce)
7. 06:02 PM - Re: Re:O&O speed? (Jerry Hey)
8. 07:24 PM - Re: STEVES BIO (Andrew Eldredge)
9. 08:58 PM - Re: STEVES BIO (Andrew Eldredge)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 0-235 IN A W-8 |
--> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Boud Kuenen" <bkuenen@horizonaero.com>
That would be a fine engine for the airplane. Its a little heavier but the
plans make up for that in the motor mount. (The C/G of the engine ends up
not as far forward of the firewall; Steve had it all covered)
As a quick rule of thumb, speed is proportional to the cube of the
horsepower. Example: an O-320-E2B has 1.5 time the power of an O-200; the
cube root of 1.5 is 1.145; subtract 1 and multiply by 100; you get 14.5%.
All else being equal, (and it never is) the same airplane should theoreticly
be 14.5% faster with a 50% increase in power. Typically you get about 2/3
of that because of increase cooling drag and higher weight. You also
sacrifice useful load and range; not to mention the cost of the engine and
the life long cost of fuel.
Boud Kuenen
NX888WT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill newkirk" <bilnewkirk@msn.com>
Subject: Re: Tailwind-List: 0-235 IN A W-8
> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Bill newkirk" <bilnewkirk@msn.com>
>
> I appreciated Boud's response to the question of a 320 in a W8. How about
> an O-235. I have one and have dis-assembled it for rebuilding. I have a
> W8/W9 to put it in.
>
> Bill Newkirk,
> Fresno, CA
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Boud Kuenen" <bkuenen@horizonaero.com>
> To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Tailwind-List: 0-320 installed in W-8
>
>
> > --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Boud Kuenen"
> <bkuenen@horizonaero.com>
> >
> > Gary,
> >
> > The W-8 airframe is about 7 inches shorter than a W-10 and it has less
> > horizontal stabilizer area as well as different design horizontal
> stabilizer
> > incidence. If you assume that your weight and balance will be OK (which
> it
> > won't), the higher speed will cause a higher wing torsion moment on the
> > airframe which will require a greater balancing force from the
horizontal
> > stabilizer. This means you will have to reset the leading edge of the
> tail
> > down. This will cause greater trim drag, and reduce the amount of
> nose-down
> > force available for such tings as high angle of attach recovery. The
net
> > increase in airspeed will not be what you might expect and you will
> > substantialy reduce the stability of the airplane. In certified
airplanes
> > that went to bigger engines over the years, (like cessna 210 and Piper
> > Comanche) the solution was/is a complicated system of balance springs
and
> > bob weights attached to the elevator system; certainly not what you want
> to
> > put in a Tailwind. If you compute the numbers on horsepower only,
(forget
> > increased weight, cooling drag, trim drag, propeller efficiency, etc.)
the
> > expected speed increase from a 150 hp engine would be about 18%, but
given
> > everything else thats involved, it probably wouldn't even be 10%. Also
,
> > you would have an airplane that is less stable, feel sluggish on the
> > controls (especially in pitch), have less useful load and range, etc.,
> etc.
> > See why Steve said, "keep it light"? In my opinion, a W-8 is one of the
> > best airplanes ever designed for 85-100 hp, keep it that way.
> >
> > Boud Kuenen
> > NX888WT
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gary Fincher" <backcountry@peedeeworld.net>
> > To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: Tailwind-List: 0-320 installed in W-8
> >
> >
> > > --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Gary Fincher"
> > <backcountry@peedeeworld.net>
> > >
> > > I have a W-8 with a C-90 and am interested in installing a 0-320. I
was
> > told that the W-8 wasn't designed for the 0-320 to be installed. Is
there
> > any out there flying? If so what needs to be done? Any replies will be
> > appreciated. Thanks, Gary Fincher
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
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: 0-235 IN A W-8 |
--> Tailwind-List message posted by: "David Magaw" <dmagaw@att.net>
Bill: I have a W-8 (but with W-10 tailfeathers and modified W-10 controls)
that I flew with an O-235 for a year (156 hours) both long cross country and
local flights. It is a delightful plane to fly. Max speed was about 157
MPH, but I think I could have gained a few MPH with a prop with a little
less pitch, and perhaps a little cleanup on the airframe here and there. My
biggest complaint was that at gross (1300#, mty was 800#) and higher density
altitudes, the takeoff and climb performance was much like a Cessna 150.
Again, some prop mods could have improved that some. But I want to be able
to fly out of Tahoe and places in New Mexico and Colorado on hot days with
two people and baggage and still have fuel to get somewhere. The O-235 will
not give safe performance with those conditions, in my opinion. Therefore,
I am in the process of converting to a 150 HP O-320. It will fit right in
and the weight is not much more. I am going to add an auxiliary fuel tank
behind the seat, also will help with the W&B.
Dave
N202Q
W-8+
>
> I appreciated Boud's response to the question of a 320 in a W8. How about
> an O-235. I have one and have dis-assembled it for rebuilding. I have a
> W8/W9 to put it in.
>
> Bill Newkirk,
> Fresno, CA
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Boud Kuenen" <bkuenen@horizonaero.com>
> To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Tailwind-List: 0-320 installed in W-8
>
>
> > --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Boud Kuenen"
> <bkuenen@horizonaero.com>
> >
> > Gary,
> >
> > The W-8 airframe is about 7 inches shorter than a W-10 and it has less
> > horizontal stabilizer area as well as different design horizontal
> stabilizer
> > incidence. If you assume that your weight and balance will be OK (which
> it
> > won't), the higher speed will cause a higher wing torsion moment on the
> > airframe which will require a greater balancing force from the
horizontal
> > stabilizer. This means you will have to reset the leading edge of the
> tail
> > down. This will cause greater trim drag, and reduce the amount of
> nose-down
> > force available for such tings as high angle of attach recovery. The
net
> > increase in airspeed will not be what you might expect and you will
> > substantialy reduce the stability of the airplane. In certified
airplanes
> > that went to bigger engines over the years, (like cessna 210 and Piper
> > Comanche) the solution was/is a complicated system of balance springs
and
> > bob weights attached to the elevator system; certainly not what you want
> to
> > put in a Tailwind. If you compute the numbers on horsepower only,
(forget
> > increased weight, cooling drag, trim drag, propeller efficiency, etc.)
the
> > expected speed increase from a 150 hp engine would be about 18%, but
given
> > everything else thats involved, it probably wouldn't even be 10%. Also
,
> > you would have an airplane that is less stable, feel sluggish on the
> > controls (especially in pitch), have less useful load and range, etc.,
> etc.
> > See why Steve said, "keep it light"? In my opinion, a W-8 is one of the
> > best airplanes ever designed for 85-100 hp, keep it that way.
> >
> > Boud Kuenen
> > NX888WT
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gary Fincher" <backcountry@peedeeworld.net>
> > To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: Tailwind-List: 0-320 installed in W-8
> >
> >
> > > --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Gary Fincher"
> > <backcountry@peedeeworld.net>
> > >
> > > I have a W-8 with a C-90 and am interested in installing a 0-320. I
was
> > told that the W-8 wasn't designed for the 0-320 to be installed. Is
there
> > any out there flying? If so what needs to be done? Any replies will be
> > appreciated. Thanks, Gary Fincher
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
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 |
|
--> Tailwind-List message posted by: mlinda@wt.net
>I believe the 300 mph speed referred to was when somebody,
I think Steve was testing the capability of two place
seating in the TAILWIND for the FAA. A weighted bag of
something was placed in the passenger seat. While
manuevering about, the weighted bag came loose and wedged
between the seat and stick. Thus making a full downward
flight and 300 mph or there about was achieved before
recovery was attained. Because the wings stayed on, the
aircraft was thought to be capable to carry a passenger
safly. I remember hearing Steve relate that story. I believe
it was at his 90 or 91st b'day party at Ocala that he
related this. RLM
--> Tailwind-List message posted by: Jerry Hey
> <j-winddesigns@thegrid.net>
> >--> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Boud Kuenen"
> <bkuenen@horizonaero.com>
>
> >SPEED!!! a real Tailwind topic.
>
> >Two questions, other than h.p. why would the O & O be
> faster than >the TW? Does it have less frontal plate for
> example. Secondly, how >fast can a good TW be? Fred,
> going downhill how fast have you >gone. I believe I
> read of someone approaching 300 mph in a dive but >I
> can't find the reference. Maybe it was Steve. Jerry
>
> >Rick,
> >
> >When I first got interested in the O&O I talked to Mac
> Mckenna, and he told >me that he was in it with Steve one
> day at 10,000 ft with the throttle all >the way in, giving
> a true airspeed of 218 mph. Since I am a numbers kind of
> >guy, that reduces to 187 mph indicated while the engine
> was generating about >166 hp, (ASSUMING IT WAS A STANDARD
> DAY). Since this was in Florida, the >temp was probably
> above standard, so the density altitude was higher than
> >10K. If this trial was conducted at an actual density
> altitude of, say, >12K, all this would suggest the
> airplane was capable of about 225 mph cruise >at 7,500.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Boud Kuenen
> >NX888WT
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Fred Weaver" <Mytyweav@flash.net>
> >To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
> >Subject: Tailwind-List: Re:O&O speed?
> >
> >
> >> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Fred Weaver
> <Mytyweav@flash.net> >>
> >> Jerome Thiessen mentioned to me that he and Steve flew
> the O&O at 250 >> indicated zipping across the farmlands.
> The airplane did have >> capabilities..
> >> Weav
> >> On Tuesday, January 21, 2003, at 06:53 AM, flamini2
> wrote: >>
> >> > --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "flamini2"
> <flamini2@attbi.com> >> >
> >> > Rick and Cindy,
> >> > i seem to remember Steve saying it was a 5 hr flight
> OSH-OCF a little >> > over
> >> > 1000 miles so over 200mph at full throttle should be
> no problem >> > Dennis in Chicago
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: "Rick and Cindy" <rcaviate@ne.infi.net>
> >> > To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
> >> > Subject: Re: Tailwind-List: W-8
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Rick and Cindy
> >> >> <rcaviate@ne.infi.net>
> >> >>
> >> >> Dennis: If everything works out I intend to enter
> O-O in some races, >> > should be
> >> >> a hoot, huh!
> >> >> Rick N241SW
> >> >>
> >> >> flamini2 wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "flamini2"
> <flamini2@attbi.com> >> >>>
> >> >>> John, Here is an old post with race speeds that
> would be about the >> >>> same
> >> > as
> >> >>> full throttle at 7500ft and 75% power cruise.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> All this talk about speed has me going through old
> Sport Aviations >> >>> back
> >> > to
> >> >>> 1963, Steve won the Lowers, Baker,Falk speed,
> payload,fastest lap >> >>> competition in 1978 with lap
> speed of 194.32mph so we are not doing >> >>> much
> >> >>> better today, That sounds good but in the
> following years no TW's were >> >>> entered and by 1985
> the fastest lap was won by AJ Smith at 231.61mph. >> >>>
> TW's in recent Sun 100 races at Sun-n- Fun >> >>> 1991
> Hiram Douglas 85 hp 161.18 mph >> >>> 1993 Lance Truax
> 90 hp 149.60 mph >> >>> 1994 Lance Truax 90 hp 160.61
> mph >> >>> 1997 Larry Pennoch 85 hp 149.13 mph this was
> > > in the Copperstate Dash >>> 2000 Dennis Flamini 180
> > > hp 195.89 mph >>> 2000 Jim Guildi 85 hp
> > > > they missed clocking him at the finish but
> > > >>> we calc his time=abt 160 mph
> > > >>> As a note in 2001 a 180hp RV-6 did 203.03 kts or
> 233.48 mph going to >> >>> be
> >> >>> tough to beat but a challenge for JC!!!
> >> >>> Any of you racers on this list want to comment on
> your adventures? >> >>> Dennis Flamini N564DF race #53
> Chicago >> >>>
> >> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >> >>> From: "john" <frmrjohn@netonecom.net>
> >> >>> To: "tailwind" <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
> >> >>> Subject: Tailwind-List: W-8
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "john"
> <frmrjohn@netonecom.net> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I have a W-8 project that I bought several years
> ago and will >> >>>> probably
> >> >>> work
> >> >>>> on it after the W-10 is completed. Question, is
> > > > anyone getting near the
> >> >>> 150
> >> >>>> mph on the c-85 engine as is stated in Steves
> material. Curious. >> > JohnD
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
>
> the Matronics Forums.
> other List members.
> Digests:http://www.matronics.com/digest/tailwind-list _-> Archives: http://www.matronics.com/archives
_-> Photo Share: http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
_-> List Specific: http://www.matronics.com/tailwind-list _-> Other Lists:
http://www.matronics.com/emaillists _-> Contributions: http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> ==============
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Tailwind speed? |
--> Tailwind-List message posted by: Fred Weaver <Mytyweav@flash.net>
Jerry.... I have never pushed beyond 250 indicated. It still feels good
and solid at that speed and I have also pulled very aggressively at that
speed also. This has provided us all with the confidence in Tailwind
wing spars. :) I believe Steve may have pushed to 300 but I wonder
more about the windshield caving in at those speeds. (1/8" plex) If
one were to install thicker plex or Lexan with supports off the tubing
to help it maintain it's curve, I wouldn't be as concerned.
The airplane feels so comfortable at 230 indicated but to do it requires
fuel burn.. I'm too cheap to go that fast all the time. 200 is an
economical speed and even more comfortable. We'll see what happens with
the new prop/props.. I'm hoping everything smooths out and goes a
little faster with the same manifold pressure.
Weav
On Tuesday, January 21, 2003, at 01:36 PM, Jerry Hey wrote:
> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Jerry Hey <j-
> winddesigns@thegrid.net>
>
>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Boud Kuenen"
>> <bkuenen@horizonaero.com>
>
>
>> SPEED!!! a real Tailwind topic.
>
>> Two questions, other than h.p. why would the O & O be faster than
>> the TW? Does it have less frontal plate for example. Secondly, how
>> fast can a good TW be? Fred, going downhill how fast have you
>> gone. I believe I read of someone approaching 300 mph in a dive but
>> I can't find the reference. Maybe it was Steve. Jerry
>
>
>> Rick,
>>
>> When I first got interested in the O&O I talked to Mac Mckenna, and he
>> told
>> me that he was in it with Steve one day at 10,000 ft with the throttle
>> all
>> the way in, giving a true airspeed of 218 mph. Since I am a numbers
>> kind of
>> guy, that reduces to 187 mph indicated while the engine was generating
>> about
>> 166 hp, (ASSUMING IT WAS A STANDARD DAY). Since this was in Florida,
>> the
>> temp was probably above standard, so the density altitude was higher
>> than
>> 10K. If this trial was conducted at an actual density altitude of,
>> say,
>> 12K, all this would suggest the airplane was capable of about 225 mph
>> cruise
>> at 7,500.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Boud Kuenen
>> NX888WT
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Fred Weaver" <Mytyweav@flash.net>
>> To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Tailwind-List: Re:O&O speed?
>>
>>
>>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Fred Weaver <Mytyweav@flash.net>
>>>
>>> Jerome Thiessen mentioned to me that he and Steve flew the O&O at 250
>>> indicated zipping across the farmlands. The airplane did have
>>> capabilities..
>>> Weav
>>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2003, at 06:53 AM, flamini2 wrote:
>>>
>>>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "flamini2" <flamini2@attbi.com>
>>>>
>>>> Rick and Cindy,
>>>> i seem to remember Steve saying it was a 5 hr flight OSH-OCF a little
>>>> over
>>>> 1000 miles so over 200mph at full throttle should be no problem
>>>> Dennis in Chicago
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Rick and Cindy" <rcaviate@ne.infi.net>
>>>> To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: Tailwind-List: W-8
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Rick and Cindy
>>>>> <rcaviate@ne.infi.net>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dennis: If everything works out I intend to enter O-O in some races,
>>>> should be
>>>>> a hoot, huh!
>>>>> Rick N241SW
>>>>>
>>>>> flamini2 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "flamini2"
>>>>>> <flamini2@attbi.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John, Here is an old post with race speeds that would be about the
>>>>>> same
>>>> as
>>>>>> full throttle at 7500ft and 75% power cruise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All this talk about speed has me going through old Sport Aviations
>>>>>> back
>>>> to
>>>>>> 1963, Steve won the Lowers, Baker,Falk speed, payload,fastest lap
>>>>>> competition in 1978 with lap speed of 194.32mph so we are not doing
>>>>>> much
>>>>>> better today, That sounds good but in the following years no TW's
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> entered and by 1985 the fastest lap was won by AJ Smith at
>>>>>> 231.61mph.
>>>>>> TW's in recent Sun 100 races at Sun-n- Fun
>>>>>> 1991 Hiram Douglas 85 hp 161.18 mph
>>>>>> 1993 Lance Truax 90 hp 149.60 mph
>>>>>> 1994 Lance Truax 90 hp 160.61 mph
>>>>>> 1997 Larry Pennoch 85 hp 149.13 mph this was in the Copperstate
>>>>>> Dash
>>>>>> 2000 Dennis Flamini 180 hp 195.89 mph
>>>>>> 2000 Jim Guildi 85 hp they missed clocking him at the
>>>>>> finish
>>>> but
>>>>>> we calc his time=abt 160 mph
>>>>>> As a note in 2001 a 180hp RV-6 did 203.03 kts or 233.48 mph going
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> tough to beat but a challenge for JC!!!
>>>>>> Any of you racers on this list want to comment on your adventures?
>>>>>> Dennis Flamini N564DF race #53 Chicago
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>> From: "john" <frmrjohn@netonecom.net>
>>>>>> To: "tailwind" <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
>>>>>> Subject: Tailwind-List: W-8
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "john"
>>>>>>> <frmrjohn@netonecom.net>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have a W-8 project that I bought several years ago and will
>>>>>>> probably
>>>>>> work
>>>>>>> on it after the W-10 is completed. Question, is anyone getting
>>>>>>> near
>>>> the
>>>>>> 150
>>>>>>> mph on the c-85 engine as is stated in Steves material. Curious.
>>>> JohnD
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
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: Tailwind W-8 speed |
--> Tailwind-List message posted by: Fred Weaver <Mytyweav@flash.net>
John... The one thing you will find out soon is the difference in Take
Off Distance, Rate of Climb and the ability to carry a much heavier
load. Hopefully, your rotary will does as well as an 0-320..
Good Luck, :)
Weav
On Wednesday, January 22, 2003, at 05:44 PM, john wrote:
> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "john" <frmrjohn@netonecom.net>
>
> Thanks for the info on the W-8, its interesting how much money and fuel
> one
> can pour into the engine ( 0-320 and or 0-360,etc.) to gain 22 or 23
> percent
> in speed. JohnD
>
>
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 |
|
--> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Earl Luce" <luceair@att.net>
Jerry
My friend Boud can calculate most any number I need . He has done allot on
TW already . he said that the wing alone was good for 20 g's.
How did the TT article go , I didn't hear back from you ?
Earl
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerry Hey" <j-winddesigns@thegrid.net>
Subject: Re: Tailwind-List: Re:O&O speed?
> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Jerry Hey <j-winddesigns@thegrid.net>
>
> >--> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Earl Luce" <luceair@att.net>
>
>
> >Earl, that story was recounted by Jim Stanton in TT number 11.
> >The only damage was to the center windshield tube. The g-meter
> >registered 8.3 positive and 3.8 negative. That was an accident.
> >Anybody do it on purpose? Amazing that one could even load the TW
> >wing to 8 gs. How fast is too fast straight and level? How about
> >250 mph? Is the TW safe at that speed.
>
>
> >
> >Jerry
> > I was told by someone that Steve hired a guy to test fly one of his TW
. He
> >put a sand bag on the right seat and put it through it's paces when the
bag
> >fell against the control stick . The plane went in a straight down dive
and
> >hit a little over 300. He managed to recover and land without incident .
> >After a closer look the rear spar carry through was bent.
> >Earl Luce
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Jerry Hey" <j-winddesigns@thegrid.net>
> >To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
> >Subject: Re: Tailwind-List: Re:O&O speed?
> >
> >
> >> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Jerry Hey
<j-winddesigns@thegrid.net>
> >>
> >> >--> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Boud Kuenen"
> ><bkuenen@horizonaero.com>
> >>
> >>
> >> >SPEED!!! a real Tailwind topic.
> >>
> >> >Two questions, other than h.p. why would the O & O be faster than
> >> >the TW? Does it have less frontal plate for example. Secondly, how
> >> >fast can a good TW be? Fred, going downhill how fast have you
> >> >gone. I believe I read of someone approaching 300 mph in a dive but
> >> >I can't find the reference. Maybe it was Steve. Jerry
> >>
> >>
> >> >Rick,
> >> >
> >> >When I first got interested in the O&O I talked to Mac Mckenna, and
he
> >told
> >> >me that he was in it with Steve one day at 10,000 ft with the
throttle
> >all
> >> >the way in, giving a true airspeed of 218 mph. Since I am a numbers
kind
> >of
> >> >guy, that reduces to 187 mph indicated while the engine was
generating
> >about
> >> >166 hp, (ASSUMING IT WAS A STANDARD DAY). Since this was in Florida,
the
> >> >temp was probably above standard, so the density altitude was higher
than
> >> >10K. If this trial was conducted at an actual density altitude of,
say,
> >> >12K, all this would suggest the airplane was capable of about 225 mph
> >cruise
> >> >at 7,500.
> >> >
> >> >Regards,
> >> >Boud Kuenen
> >> >NX888WT
> >> >----- Original Message -----
> >> >From: "Fred Weaver" <Mytyweav@flash.net>
> >> >To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
> >> >Subject: Tailwind-List: Re:O&O speed?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Fred Weaver
<Mytyweav@flash.net>
> >> >>
> >> >> Jerome Thiessen mentioned to me that he and Steve flew the O&O at
250
> >> >> indicated zipping across the farmlands. The airplane did have
> >> >> capabilities..
> >> >> Weav
> >> >> On Tuesday, January 21, 2003, at 06:53 AM, flamini2 wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "flamini2"
<flamini2@attbi.com>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Rick and Cindy,
> >> >> > i seem to remember Steve saying it was a 5 hr flight OSH-OCF a
> >little
> >> >> > over
> >> >> > 1000 miles so over 200mph at full throttle should be no problem
> >> >> > Dennis in Chicago
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> >> > From: "Rick and Cindy" <rcaviate@ne.infi.net>
> > > >> > To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
> > > >> > Subject: Re: Tailwind-List: W-8
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Rick and Cindy
> > > >> >> <rcaviate@ne.infi.net>
> > > >> >>
> >> >> >> Dennis: If everything works out I intend to enter O-O in some
> >races,
> >> >> > should be
> >> >> >> a hoot, huh!
> >> >> >> Rick N241SW
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> flamini2 wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "flamini2"
> ><flamini2@attbi.com>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> John, Here is an old post with race speeds that would be about
the
> >> >> >>> same
> >> >> > as
> >> >> >>> full throttle at 7500ft and 75% power cruise.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> All this talk about speed has me going through old Sport
Aviations
> >> >> >>> back
> >> >> > to
> >> >> >>> 1963, Steve won the Lowers, Baker,Falk speed, payload,fastest
lap
> >> >> >>> competition in 1978 with lap speed of 194.32mph so we are not
> >doing
> >> >> >>> much
> >> >> >>> better today, That sounds good but in the following years no
TW's
> >were
> >> >> >>> entered and by 1985 the fastest lap was won by AJ Smith at
> >231.61mph.
> >> >> >>> TW's in recent Sun 100 races at Sun-n- Fun
> >> >> >>> 1991 Hiram Douglas 85 hp 161.18 mph
> >> >> >>> 1993 Lance Truax 90 hp 149.60 mph
> >> >> >>> 1994 Lance Truax 90 hp 160.61 mph
> >> >> >>> 1997 Larry Pennoch 85 hp 149.13 mph this was in the
Copperstate
> >Dash
> >> > > >>> 2000 Dennis Flamini 180 hp 195.89 mph
> >> > > >>> 2000 Jim Guildi 85 hp they missed clocking him at
the
> >finish
> >> > > > but
> >> > > >>> we calc his time=abt 160 mph
> >> > > >>> As a note in 2001 a 180hp RV-6 did 203.03 kts or 233.48 mph
going
> >to
> >> >> >>> be
> >> >> >>> tough to beat but a challenge for JC!!!
> >> >> >>> Any of you racers on this list want to comment on your
adventures?
> >> >> >>> Dennis Flamini N564DF race #53 Chicago
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >> >> >>> From: "john" <frmrjohn@netonecom.net>
> >> >> >>> To: "tailwind" <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
> >> >> >>> Subject: Tailwind-List: W-8
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "john"
> ><frmrjohn@netonecom.net>
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> I have a W-8 project that I bought several years ago and will
> >> >> >>>> probably
> >> >> >>> work
> >> >> >>>> on it after the W-10 is completed. Question, is anyone
getting
> >near
> >> > > > the
> >> >> >>> 150
> >> >> >>>> mph on the c-85 engine as is stated in Steves material.
Curious.
> >> >> > JohnD
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
>
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 |
|
--> Tailwind-List message posted by: Jerry Hey <j-winddesigns@thegrid.net>
>--> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Earl Luce" <luceair@att.net>
> Earl, the article looks good. We plan to mail the TT tomorrow.
>Do you think Baud would be willing to have his structural analysis
>published in the TT? I would like to correspond with him but I
>don't have his e-mail address. Could you ask him to drop me a note
>or send me his address. Thanks Jerry
>Jerry
> My friend Boud can calculate most any number I need . He has done allot on
>TW already . he said that the wing alone was good for 20 g's.
> How did the TT article go , I didn't hear back from you ?
>Earl
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jerry Hey" <j-winddesigns@thegrid.net>
>To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: Tailwind-List: Re:O&O speed?
>
>
>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Jerry Hey <j-winddesigns@thegrid.net>
>>
>> >--> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Earl Luce" <luceair@att.net>
>>
>>
>> >Earl, that story was recounted by Jim Stanton in TT number 11.
>> >The only damage was to the center windshield tube. The g-meter
>> >registered 8.3 positive and 3.8 negative. That was an accident.
>> >Anybody do it on purpose? Amazing that one could even load the TW
>> >wing to 8 gs. How fast is too fast straight and level? How about
>> >250 mph? Is the TW safe at that speed.
>>
>>
>> >
>> >Jerry
>> > I was told by someone that Steve hired a guy to test fly one of his TW
>. He
>> >put a sand bag on the right seat and put it through it's paces when the
>bag
>> >fell against the control stick . The plane went in a straight down dive
>and
>> >hit a little over 300. He managed to recover and land without incident .
>> >After a closer look the rear spar carry through was bent.
>> >Earl Luce
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: "Jerry Hey" <j-winddesigns@thegrid.net>
>> >To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
>> >Subject: Re: Tailwind-List: Re:O&O speed?
>> >
>> >
>> >> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Jerry Hey
><j-winddesigns@thegrid.net>
>> >>
>> >> >--> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Boud Kuenen"
>> ><bkuenen@horizonaero.com>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >SPEED!!! a real Tailwind topic.
>> >>
>> >> >Two questions, other than h.p. why would the O & O be faster than
>> >> >the TW? Does it have less frontal plate for example. Secondly, how
>> >> >fast can a good TW be? Fred, going downhill how fast have you
>> >> >gone. I believe I read of someone approaching 300 mph in a dive but
>> >> >I can't find the reference. Maybe it was Steve. Jerry
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >Rick,
>> >> >
>> >> >When I first got interested in the O&O I talked to Mac Mckenna, and
>he
>> >told
>> >> >me that he was in it with Steve one day at 10,000 ft with the
>throttle
>> >all
>> >> >the way in, giving a true airspeed of 218 mph. Since I am a numbers
>kind
>> >of
>> >> >guy, that reduces to 187 mph indicated while the engine was
>generating
>> >about
>> >> >166 hp, (ASSUMING IT WAS A STANDARD DAY). Since this was in Florida,
>the
>> >> >temp was probably above standard, so the density altitude was higher
>than
>> >> >10K. If this trial was conducted at an actual density altitude of,
>say,
> > >> >12K, all this would suggest the airplane was capable of about 225 mph
> > >cruise
> > >> >at 7,500.
> > >> >
> > >> >Regards,
> > >> >Boud Kuenen
> > >> >NX888WT
>> >> >----- Original Message -----
>> >> >From: "Fred Weaver" <Mytyweav@flash.net>
>> >> >To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
>> >> >Subject: Tailwind-List: Re:O&O speed?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Fred Weaver
><Mytyweav@flash.net>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Jerome Thiessen mentioned to me that he and Steve flew the O&O at
>250
>> >> >> indicated zipping across the farmlands. The airplane did have
>> >> >> capabilities..
>> >> >> Weav
>> >> >> On Tuesday, January 21, 2003, at 06:53 AM, flamini2 wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "flamini2"
><flamini2@attbi.com>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Rick and Cindy,
>> >> >> > i seem to remember Steve saying it was a 5 hr flight OSH-OCF a
> > >little
>> >> >> > over
>> >> >> > 1000 miles so over 200mph at full throttle should be no problem
>> >> >> > Dennis in Chicago
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > ----- Original Message -----
>> >> >> > From: "Rick and Cindy" <rcaviate@ne.infi.net>
>> > > >> > To: <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
>> > > >> > Subject: Re: Tailwind-List: W-8
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: Rick and Cindy
>> > > >> >> <rcaviate@ne.infi.net>
>> > > >> >>
>> >> >> >> Dennis: If everything works out I intend to enter O-O in some
>> >races,
>> >> >> > should be
>> >> >> >> a hoot, huh!
>> >> >> >> Rick N241SW
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> flamini2 wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "flamini2"
>> ><flamini2@attbi.com>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> John, Here is an old post with race speeds that would be about
>the
>> >> >> >>> same
>> >> >> > as
>> >> >> >>> full throttle at 7500ft and 75% power cruise.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> All this talk about speed has me going through old Sport
>Aviations
>> >> >> >>> back
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >>> 1963, Steve won the Lowers, Baker,Falk speed, payload,fastest
>lap
>> >> >> >>> competition in 1978 with lap speed of 194.32mph so we are not
>> >doing
>> >> >> >>> much
>> >> >> >>> better today, That sounds good but in the following years no
>TW's
>> >were
>> >> >> >>> entered and by 1985 the fastest lap was won by AJ Smith at
>> >231.61mph.
>> >> >> >>> TW's in recent Sun 100 races at Sun-n- Fun
>> >> >> >>> 1991 Hiram Douglas 85 hp 161.18 mph
>> >> >> >>> 1993 Lance Truax 90 hp 149.60 mph
>> >> >> >>> 1994 Lance Truax 90 hp 160.61 mph
>> >> >> >>> 1997 Larry Pennoch 85 hp 149.13 mph this was in the
>Copperstate
>> >Dash
>> >> > > >>> 2000 Dennis Flamini 180 hp 195.89 mph
>> >> > > >>> 2000 Jim Guildi 85 hp they missed clocking him at
>the
>> >finish
>> >> > > > but
>> >> > > >>> we calc his time=abt 160 mph
>> >> > > >>> As a note in 2001 a 180hp RV-6 did 203.03 kts or 233.48 mph
>going
>> >to
>> >> >> >>> be
>> >> >> >>> tough to beat but a challenge for JC!!!
>> >> >> >>> Any of you racers on this list want to comment on your
>adventures?
>> >> >> >>> Dennis Flamini N564DF race #53 Chicago
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> >> >>> From: "john" <frmrjohn@netonecom.net>
>> >> >> >>> To: "tailwind" <tailwind-list@matronics.com>
>> >> >> >>> Subject: Tailwind-List: W-8
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>> --> Tailwind-List message posted by: "john"
>> ><frmrjohn@netonecom.net>
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>> I have a W-8 project that I bought several years ago and will
>> >> >> >>>> probably
>> >> >> >>> work
>> >> >> >>>> on it after the W-10 is completed. Question, is anyone
>getting
>> >near
>> >> > > > the
>> >> >> >>> 150
>> >> >> >>>> mph on the c-85 engine as is stated in Steves material.
>Curious.
>> >> >> > JohnD
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>
>
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 |
|
--> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Andrew Eldredge" <andrewe@byu.edu>
I'm looking for the Article you cited, Checked with my local library in
years 2002 and 2001, Was that the right refrence?
Andrew Eldredge
Provo, UT
Building Jigs
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-tailwind-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-tailwind-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
mlinda@wt.net
Subject: Tailwind-List: STEVES BIO
--> Tailwind-List message posted by: mlinda@wt.net
The magazine "Aviation History" March 2003 issue has a 7
page biography on Steve Wittman done by Don Berliner. It is fairly
straight forward.
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
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 |
|
--> Tailwind-List message posted by: "Andrew Eldredge" <andrewe@byu.edu>
Well, the Harold B. Lee Librarians came through for me and found the
article in electronic format now. It makes for fascinating reading for
guys like me who have only a glimmer of an idea of the aviation and
racing climate was like back in the day. It makes me proud to have a
guy like Steve behind my project.
Andrew Eldredge
Provo, UT
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-tailwind-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-tailwind-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
mlinda@wt.net
Subject: Tailwind-List: STEVES BIO
--> Tailwind-List message posted by: mlinda@wt.net
The magazine "Aviation History" March 2003 issue has a 7
page biography on Steve Wittman done by Don Berliner. It is fairly
straight forward.
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
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! --
|