---------------------------------------------------------- TeamGrumman-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 10/06/15: 4 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 06:37 AM - Re: AA5B vs. AG5B (cannuck) 2. 06:37 AM - Re: AA5B vs. AG5B (cannuck) 3. 06:38 AM - Re: AA5B vs. AG5B (cannuck) 4. 10:03 AM - Re: Re: AA5B vs. AG5B (Gary L Vogt) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 06:37:10 AM PST US Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AA5B vs. AG5B From: "cannuck" Thanks for the replies thus far. I do have to confess, my AA was tweeked quite a bit (more-or-less within what one could get away with 30 years ago in our heavily regulated environment). I had removed the exhaust baffles and cabin steps, sealed most non-moving gaps, rigged a bit of reflex in both ailerons and flaps (usually flew light so benefited from shift in center of pressure by less induced drag from wing and trim drag from elevator.) So, my frame of reference is not accurate (and most had to be reversed for inspections). What I DID notice was that I could run and hide from "faster" brand P&C retractables with ease. From this, I have come to prefer side-by-side comparisons as the most accurate indicator of differences - real or imagined. I noticed that the AG actually shows 2 knots higher cruise by book, but EVERYONE I have ever spoken with notes that the AGs are slower. In the boom years, genav manufacturers used the book values much like a US car manufacturer - making ridiculous and unsupportable claims for power/speed. In my experience, increasing engine power makes for very small increases in speed, mostly can be seen in climb performance. The big differences (and here I mean in one knot chunks) usually comes from fixing an aerodynamic problem that someone didn't know was there. -------- AA1 and AA5B former (future?) owner Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=447718#447718 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:37:57 AM PST US Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AA5B vs. AG5B From: "cannuck" Thanks for the replies thus far. I do have to confess, my AA was tweeked quite a bit (more-or-less within what one could get away with 30 years ago in our heavily regulated environment). I had removed the exhaust baffles and cabin steps, sealed most non-moving gaps, rigged a bit of reflex in both ailerons and flaps (usually flew light so benefited from shift in center of pressure by less induced drag from wing and trim drag from elevator.) So, my frame of reference is not accurate (and most had to be reversed for inspections). What I DID notice was that I could run and hide from "faster" brand P&C retractables with ease. From this, I have come to prefer side-by-side comparisons as the most accurate indicator of differences - real or imagined. I noticed that the AG actually shows 2 knots higher cruise by book, but EVERYONE I have ever spoken with notes that the AGs are slower. In the boom years, genav manufacturers used the book values much like a US car manufacturer - making ridiculous and unsupportable claims for power/speed. In my experience, increasing engine power makes for very small increases in speed, mostly can be seen in climb performance. The big differences (and here I mean in one knot chunks) usually comes from fixing an aerodynamic problem that someone didn't know was there. -------- AA1 and AA5B former (future?) owner Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=447719#447719 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:38:17 AM PST US Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AA5B vs. AG5B From: "cannuck" Thanks for the replies thus far. I do have to confess, my AA was tweeked quite a bit (more-or-less within what one could get away with 30 years ago in our heavily regulated environment). I had removed the exhaust baffles and cabin steps, sealed most non-moving gaps, rigged a bit of reflex in both ailerons and flaps (usually flew light so benefited from shift in center of pressure by less induced drag from wing and trim drag from elevator.) So, my frame of reference is not accurate (and most had to be reversed for inspections). What I DID notice was that I could run and hide from "faster" brand P&C retractables with ease. From this, I have come to prefer side-by-side comparisons as the most accurate indicator of differences - real or imagined. I noticed that the AG actually shows 2 knots higher cruise by book, but EVERYONE I have ever spoken with notes that the AGs are slower. In the boom years, genav manufacturers used the book values much like a US car manufacturer - making ridiculous and unsupportable claims for power/speed. In my experience, increasing engine power makes for very small increases in speed, mostly can be seen in climb performance. The big differences (and here I mean in one knot chunks) usually comes from fixing an aerodynamic problem that someone didn't know was there. -------- AA1 and AA5B former (future?) owner Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=447720#447720 ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 10:03:49 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: AA5B vs. AG5B From: Gary L Vogt My AA5B trued at 160 knots before I began major restoration. > On Oct 6, 2015, at 6:19 AM, cannuck wrote: > > > Thanks for the replies thus far. > > I do have to confess, my AA was tweeked quite a bit (more-or-less within what one could get away with 30 years ago in our heavily regulated environment). I had removed the exhaust baffles and cabin steps, sealed most non-moving gaps, rigged a bit of reflex in both ailerons and flaps (usually flew light so benefited from shift in center of pressure by less induced drag from wing and trim drag from elevator.) So, my frame of reference is not accurate (and most had to be reversed for inspections). > > What I DID notice was that I could run and hide from "faster" brand P&C retractables with ease. From this, I have come to prefer side-by-side comparisons as the most accurate indicator of differences - real or imagined. > > I noticed that the AG actually shows 2 knots higher cruise by book, but EVERYONE I have ever spoken with notes that the AGs are slower. In the boom years, genav manufacturers used the book values much like a US car manufacturer - making ridiculous and unsupportable claims for power/speed. > > In my experience, increasing engine power makes for very small increases in speed, mostly can be seen in climb performance. The big differences (and here I mean in one knot chunks) usually comes from fixing an aerodynamic problem that someone didn't know was there. > > -------- > AA1 and AA5B former (future?) owner > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=447720#447720 > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message teamgrumman-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/TeamGrumman-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/teamgrumman-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/teamgrumman-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.