Putting Numbers with my Numbers


Jay Scheevel <scheevel@...>
 

Hi Guys,

I have crunched all the wing incidence angle measurements I took on wings at
the FOD fly-in but, unfortunately, I did not get anything sent to Doug prior
to press time for the 3rd quarter Q-talk newsletter. I am working on putting
a comprehensive article together for his final newsletter in December, but I
need to enter the "final phase" of analysis: namely getting some performance
figures to go with the measurements. I have thought about how to make this
an objective exercise and have come up with following requested numbers from
the pilots/planes that I measured:
@ as close to 1000 lbs. gross weight as you can get.
1. Straight and level indicated airspeed (IAS) @ 8000' density
altitude and 60 hp
2. Pitch-buck IAS @ 8000' density altitude power off.
3. Your "global average" x-country groundspeed at whatever your normal
cruise settings are.
Measurements 1 and 2 will require some %-power calculations to be done
depending on your powerplant, but everyone should be able to gather them in
all a/c I measured. The main idea is that these figures will objectively
compare the behavior of the wings regardless of powerplant. The only wild
card is the tri-gear versus taildragger (parasitic drag items). Item number
3 will allow a more subjective comparison of the entire aircraft package to
one another and give the fast guys a chance to brag.
The performance numbers that I am asking/pleading for right now are for just
the planes that I measured at FOD (listed below). I promise to send an
autographed hardcopy glossy color print of the voluminous final report to
anyone who sends me their numbers :-) Anyone else can pitch in now or
later, as I will continue to measure your planes where ever I find them, so
be forewarned (Kevin?? Bruce?? Jon?? LVK'ers??).
Requested performance right now from:
Plane Owner/Pilot Powerplant?
N131PS Paul Spackman J-3300
N625JM Jerry Marstall O-200
N142LF Lynn French O-200
N202SH Sam Hoskins O-200
N17PF Paul Fischer O-200
N311DM Mitch Hargin Rev2100 ??
N817RC Bob Clark O-200 ??

Thanks in advance to all of you guys for being the Guinea Pigs.
Cheers,

Jay Scheevel -- Tri-Q Still building


Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...>
 

OK, so I give up. How do I calculate 60HP at 8000' density altitude? Since I don't have a HP gauge in the airplane (or manifold pressure), I figure I'm going to have to equate that to RPM. But doesn't propeller efficiency come into play here too?

What are the other guys with the O-200's going to use as a power setting to get Jay's numbers? I'll try to help, but I can't imagine how we are going to get numbers that are comparable. There just seem like there are too many variables.

- Paul

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 10:45
To: Q-list@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers

I have thought about how to make this
an objective exercise and have come up with following requested numbers from
the pilots/planes that I measured:
@ as close to 1000 lbs. gross weight as you can get.
1. Straight and level indicated airspeed (IAS) @ 8000' density
altitude and 60 hp
2. Pitch-buck IAS @ 8000' density altitude power off.
3. Your "global average" x-country groundspeed at whatever your normal
cruise settings are.
Measurements 1 and 2 will require some %-power calculations to be done
depending on your powerplant, but everyone should be able to gather them in
all a/c I measured.


Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
 

I had the same question. Of course, I'm rather ignorant on these matters.
J

Fisher Paul A. wrote:


OK, so I give up. How do I calculate 60HP at 8000' density altitude?
Since I don't have a HP gauge in the airplane (or manifold pressure),
I figure I'm going to have to equate that to RPM. But doesn't
propeller efficiency come into play here too?

What are the other guys with the O-200's going to use as a power
setting to get Jay's numbers? I'll try to help, but I can't imagine
how we are going to get numbers that are comparable. There just seem
like there are too many variables.

- Paul

From: Q-LIST@... <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:Q-LIST@... <mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>] On
Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 10:45
To: Q-list@... <mailto:Q-list%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers

I have thought about how to make this
an objective exercise and have come up with following requested
numbers from
the pilots/planes that I measured:
@ as close to 1000 lbs. gross weight as you can get.
1. Straight and level indicated airspeed (IAS) @ 8000' density
altitude and 60 hp
2. Pitch-buck IAS @ 8000' density altitude power off.
3. Your "global average" x-country groundspeed at whatever your normal
cruise settings are.
Measurements 1 and 2 will require some %-power calculations to be done
depending on your powerplant, but everyone should be able to gather
them in
all a/c I measured.





------------------------------------------------------------------------
No viruses found in this incoming message
Scanned by *iolo AntiVirus 1.5.4.5*
http://www.iolo.com <http://www.iolo.com/iav/iavpop3>

_______________________________________
No viruses found in this outgoing message
Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.4.5
http://www.iolo.com


kr2flyer1986
 

Using the flue flow limits chart in the 0-200 manual.  Its show 60 percent power for the 0-200 would be 2330 R.P.M. Just my 2 cents,my not be correct.
Bob Clark

--- On Mon, 10/26/09, Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...> wrote:

From: Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...>
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers
To: Q-LIST@...
Date: Monday, October 26, 2009, 11:05 AM






 





I had the same question. Of course, I'm rather ignorant on these matters.

J



Fisher Paul A. wrote:

OK, so I give up. How do I calculate 60HP at 8000' density altitude?
Since I don't have a HP gauge in the airplane (or manifold pressure),
I figure I'm going to have to equate that to RPM. But doesn't
propeller efficiency come into play here too?
What are the other guys with the O-200's going to use as a power
setting to get Jay's numbers? I'll try to help, but I can't imagine
how we are going to get numbers that are comparable. There just seem
like there are too many variables.
- Paul
From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com <mailto:Q-LIST% 40yahoogroups. com>
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com <mailto:Q-LIST% 40yahoogroups. com>] On
Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 10:45
To: Q-list@yahoogroups. com <mailto:Q-list% 40yahoogroups. com>
Subject: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers
I have thought about how to make this
an objective exercise and have come up with following requested
numbers from
the pilots/planes that I measured:
@ as close to 1000 lbs. gross weight as you can get.
1. Straight and level indicated airspeed (IAS) @ 8000' density
altitude and 60 hp
2. Pitch-buck IAS @ 8000' density altitude power off.
3. Your "global average" x-country groundspeed at whatever your normal
cruise settings are.
Measurements 1 and 2 will require some %-power calculations to be done
depending on your powerplant, but everyone should be able to gather
them in
all a/c I measured.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
No viruses found in this incoming message
Scanned by *iolo AntiVirus 1.5.4.5*
http://www.iolo. com <http://www.iolo. com/iav/iavpop3>


____________ _________ _________ _________

No viruses found in this outgoing message

Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.4.5

http://www.iolo. com



































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...>
 

I saw that too Bob, but isn't that at sea level? How do we account for the 8000' density altitude that Jay wanted? I'm not an aerodynamicist, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I thought there were more variables involved.

However, if we (the O-200 guys), agree that 2330 is the RPM setting that we all use, that's good enough for me!

- Paul

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of robert clark
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 10:34
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers



Using the flue flow limits chart in the 0-200 manual. Its show 60 percent power for the 0-200 would be 2330 R.P.M. Just my 2 cents,my not be correct.
Bob Clark

--- On Mon, 10/26/09, Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...<mailto:jnmarstall%40bellsouth.net>> wrote:

From: Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@...<mailto:jnmarstall%40bellsouth.net>>
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers
To: Q-LIST@...<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>
Date: Monday, October 26, 2009, 11:05 AM



I had the same question. Of course, I'm rather ignorant on these matters.

J

Fisher Paul A. wrote:

OK, so I give up. How do I calculate 60HP at 8000' density altitude?
Since I don't have a HP gauge in the airplane (or manifold pressure),
I figure I'm going to have to equate that to RPM. But doesn't
propeller efficiency come into play here too?
What are the other guys with the O-200's going to use as a power
setting to get Jay's numbers? I'll try to help, but I can't imagine
how we are going to get numbers that are comparable. There just seem
like there are too many variables.
- Paul
From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com <mailto:Q-LIST% 40yahoogroups. com>
[mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com <mailto:Q-LIST% 40yahoogroups. com>] On
Behalf Of Jay Scheevel
Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 10:45
To: Q-list@yahoogroups. com <mailto:Q-list% 40yahoogroups. com>
Subject: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers
I have thought about how to make this
an objective exercise and have come up with following requested
numbers from
the pilots/planes that I measured:
@ as close to 1000 lbs. gross weight as you can get.
1. Straight and level indicated airspeed (IAS) @ 8000' density
altitude and 60 hp
2. Pitch-buck IAS @ 8000' density altitude power off.
3. Your "global average" x-country groundspeed at whatever your normal
cruise settings are.
Measurements 1 and 2 will require some %-power calculations to be done
depending on your powerplant, but everyone should be able to gather
them in
all a/c I measured.
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
No viruses found in this incoming message
Scanned by *iolo AntiVirus 1.5.4.5*
http://www.iolo. com <http://www.iolo. com/iav/iavpop3>
____________ _________ _________ _________

No viruses found in this outgoing message

Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.4.5

http://www.iolo. com


kr2flyer1986
 

You are correct its at sea level. Will need someone smarter than me to figure out  the 8000 foot part.
Bob Clark

--- On Mon, 10/26/09, Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...> wrote:

From: Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...>
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers
To: "Q-LIST@..." <Q-LIST@...>
Date: Monday, October 26, 2009, 11:48 AM






 





I saw that too Bob, but isn't that at sea level? How do we account for the 8000' density altitude that Jay wanted? I'm not an aerodynamicist, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I thought there were more variables involved.



However, if we (the O-200 guys), agree that 2330 is the RPM setting that we all use, that's good enough for me!



- Paul



From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robert clark

Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 10:34

To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com

Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers



Using the flue flow limits chart in the 0-200 manual. Its show 60 percent power for the 0-200 would be 2330 R.P.M. Just my 2 cents,my not be correct.

Bob Clark



--- On Mon, 10/26/09, Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@bellsout h.net<mailto:jnmarstall% 40bellsouth. net>> wrote:



From: Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@bellsout h.net<mailto:jnmarstall% 40bellsouth. net>>

Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers

To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com<mailto:Q-LIST% 40yahoogroups. com>

Date: Monday, October 26, 2009, 11:05 AM



I had the same question. Of course, I'm rather ignorant on these matters.



J



Fisher Paul A. wrote:







OK, so I give up. How do I calculate 60HP at 8000' density altitude?


Since I don't have a HP gauge in the airplane (or manifold pressure),


I figure I'm going to have to equate that to RPM. But doesn't


propeller efficiency come into play here too?




What are the other guys with the O-200's going to use as a power


setting to get Jay's numbers? I'll try to help, but I can't imagine


how we are going to get numbers that are comparable. There just seem


like there are too many variables.




- Paul




From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com <mailto:Q-LIST% 40yahoogroups. com>


[mailto:Q-LIST@ yahoogroups. com <mailto:Q-LIST% 40yahoogroups. com>] On


Behalf Of Jay Scheevel


Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 10:45


To: Q-list@yahoogroups. com <mailto:Q-list% 40yahoogroups. com>


Subject: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers




I have thought about how to make this


an objective exercise and have come up with following requested


numbers from


the pilots/planes that I measured:


@ as close to 1000 lbs. gross weight as you can get.


1. Straight and level indicated airspeed (IAS) @ 8000' density


altitude and 60 hp


2. Pitch-buck IAS @ 8000' density altitude power off.


3. Your "global average" x-country groundspeed at whatever your normal


cruise settings are.


Measurements 1 and 2 will require some %-power calculations to be done


depending on your powerplant, but everyone should be able to gather


them in


all a/c I measured.












------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -


No viruses found in this incoming message


Scanned by *iolo AntiVirus 1.5.4.5*


http://www.iolo. com <http://www.iolo. com/iav/iavpop3>




____________ _________ _________ _________



No viruses found in this outgoing message



Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.4.5



http://www.iolo. com







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


iceobar <ascanielsen@...>
 

It's getting close to Christmas, so "some assmebly required"....but here is a copy of the POH for an O-200A powered C-150 and on pg 19 it has the "Cruise Performance" chart with the comparative Altitude, RPM, %BHP and FF figures. Some interpolation will be needed to match the requested figures but it is a good guide to start of with....

http://www.micro-tools.net/pdf/Cessna/150_poh_64.pdf

--- In Q-LIST@..., robert clark <kr2flyer1986@...> wrote:

You are correct its at sea level. Will need someone smarter than me to figure out  the 8000 foot part.
Bob Clark

--- On Mon, 10/26/09, Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...> wrote:

From: Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...>
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers
To: "Q-LIST@..." <Q-LIST@...>
Date: Monday, October 26, 2009, 11:48 AM






 





I saw that too Bob, but isn't that at sea level? How do we account for the 8000' density altitude that Jay wanted? I'm not an aerodynamicist, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I thought there were more variables involved.



However, if we (the O-200 guys), agree that 2330 is the RPM setting that we all use, that's good enough for me!



- Paul



From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com [mailto:Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of robert clark

Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 10:34

To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com

Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers



Using the flue flow limits chart in the 0-200 manual. Its show 60 percent power for the 0-200 would be 2330 R.P.M. Just my 2 cents,my not be correct.

Bob Clark



--- On Mon, 10/26/09, Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@bellsout h.net<mailto:jnmarstall% 40bellsouth. net>> wrote:



From: Jerry Marstall <jnmarstall@bellsout h.net<mailto:jnmarstall% 40bellsouth. net>>

Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers

To: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com<mailto:Q-LIST% 40yahoogroups. com>

Date: Monday, October 26, 2009, 11:05 AM



I had the same question. Of course, I'm rather ignorant on these matters.



J



Fisher Paul A. wrote:







OK, so I give up. How do I calculate 60HP at 8000' density altitude?


Since I don't have a HP gauge in the airplane (or manifold pressure),


I figure I'm going to have to equate that to RPM. But doesn't


propeller efficiency come into play here too?




What are the other guys with the O-200's going to use as a power


setting to get Jay's numbers? I'll try to help, but I can't imagine


how we are going to get numbers that are comparable. There just seem


like there are too many variables.




- Paul




From: Q-LIST@yahoogroups. com <mailto:Q-LIST% 40yahoogroups. com>


[mailto:Q-LIST@ yahoogroups. com <mailto:Q-LIST% 40yahoogroups. com>] On


Behalf Of Jay Scheevel


Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 10:45


To: Q-list@yahoogroups. com <mailto:Q-list% 40yahoogroups. com>


Subject: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers




I have thought about how to make this


an objective exercise and have come up with following requested


numbers from


the pilots/planes that I measured:


@ as close to 1000 lbs. gross weight as you can get.


1. Straight and level indicated airspeed (IAS) @ 8000' density


altitude and 60 hp


2. Pitch-buck IAS @ 8000' density altitude power off.


3. Your "global average" x-country groundspeed at whatever your normal


cruise settings are.


Measurements 1 and 2 will require some %-power calculations to be done


depending on your powerplant, but everyone should be able to gather


them in


all a/c I measured.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -


No viruses found in this incoming message


Scanned by *iolo AntiVirus 1.5.4.5*


http://www.iolo. com <http://www.iolo. com/iav/iavpop3>




____________ _________ _________ _________



No viruses found in this outgoing message



Scanned by iolo AntiVirus 1.5.4.5



http://www.iolo. com











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]































[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


jon@...
 

This is only a rule of thumb and is based on pressure altitude (not DA) so not precise but I have always understood that we lose 3% of our horsepower per 1000'. So, 100hp at seal level = 76hp @ 8000'.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: "robert clark" <kr2flyer1986@...>
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 9:53am
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers

You are correct its at sea level. Will need someone smarter than me to figure out the 8000 foot part.
Bob Clark

--- On Mon, 10/26/09, Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...> wrote:

From: Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...>
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers
To: "Q-LIST@..." <Q-LIST@...>
Date: Monday, October 26, 2009, 11:48 AM












I saw that too Bob, but isn't that at sea level? How do we account for the 8000' density altitude that Jay wanted? I'm not an aerodynamicist, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but I thought there were more variables involved.



However, if we (the O-200 guys), agree that 2330 is the RPM setting that we all use, that's good enough for me!



- Paul


Bruce Crain
 

Ha ha!! I can make my rpms anything I want with the MT prop so ya gotta' give me manifold pressure also. ;o)

I had another question that may be less than stellar. When the measurements were taken were the Quickies all in the same level attitude? Or does it matter with the way they were checked? How did the pilots set the planes up to level in the field?

Bruce

Please note: message attached

From: Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...>
To: "Q-LIST@..." <Q-LIST@...>
Subject: RE: [Q-LIST] Putting Numbers with my Numbers
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:48:11 -0500


____________________________________________________________
Cheap Diet Help Tips. Click here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2131/fc/BLSrjnsK7AUtt1zLNGs8jptAqjnk63uw3Cyxrci2kXTeuMtP69cV1pOSGxa/


JAY SCHEEVEL <scheevel@...>
 

Hi Guys,

Ok, sorry for the confusion. Paul Spackman contacted me offline and suggested that I may create confusion with the 60 hp number. I have done a little number crunching and I think that at 8000' density altitude you can use 2490 rpm in the O-200 to generate 60 hp. (PA and DA are the same on a standard day, which is what the 0-200 numbers are published for). Non- O-200 guys, pipe-up if you are unable to come up with the right numbers for 60 hp and we will see if we can sort that out also.
__
Bruce, I think that you can set your electric prop to 2490 rpm, then close the throttle, read the MP then go to full throttle and read the MP, then take 75% of the distance between the low (closed throttle) MP and the MAX (full throttle) MP, and that should be your MP setting for the test. For example, if you close the throttle and get 15" MP and you go full throttle and get 25", then you would take the difference of 15" and 25" (10) times 0.75 (to get 7.5") and add that to 15" to get 22.5" setting. These numbers are just a guess, you would actually have to do this measurement and calculation in flight (take honey-lamb and a calculator).
__
Also, by straight and level, I do not mean that the fuselage has to be level, I just mean that you have to hold altitude constant at whatever pressure altitude corresponds a density altitude of 8000' on the day you measure the numbers.
__
One more item, if you can give me the pitch and diameter of your prop, I will do a little handicapping with a program that I have to see if I should apply a correction for that. Bruce, you will have to estimate your pitch for me at the settings that you come up with for the experiment.
__
Thanks much guys for all of your help on this project. I hope it will shed some light on the aerodynamics of these little planes.

Cheers,
Jay -- Tri-Q still building


hargin
 

Jay,
311DM is a Type IV around a 2.5L.  2490rpm is way below its powerband.  Could you elaborate about "Pitch Buck" IAS.  Thanks,
Mitch

--- On Tue, 10/27/09, JAY SCHEEVEL <scheevel@...> wrote:


From: JAY SCHEEVEL <scheevel@...>
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Putting Numbers with my Numbers
To: Q-list@...
Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2009, 9:59 AM


 



Hi Guys,

Ok, sorry for the confusion. Paul Spackman contacted me offline and suggested
that I may create confusion with the 60 hp number. I have done a little number
crunching and I think that at 8000' density altitude you can use 2490 rpm in
the O-200 to generate 60 hp. (PA and DA are the same on a standard day, which
is what the 0-200 numbers are published for). Non- O-200 guys, pipe-up if you
are unable to come up with the right numbers for 60 hp and we will see if we
can sort that out also.
__
Bruce, I think that you can set your electric prop to 2490 rpm, then close the
throttle, read the MP then go to full throttle and read the MP, then take 75%
of the distance between the low (closed throttle) MP and the MAX (full
throttle) MP, and that should be your MP setting for the test. For example, if
you close the throttle and get 15" MP and you go full throttle and get 25",
then you would take the difference of 15" and 25" (10) times 0.75 (to get
7.5") and add that to 15" to get 22.5" setting. These numbers are just a
guess, you would actually have to do this measurement and calculation in
flight (take honey-lamb and a calculator).
__
Also, by straight and level, I do not mean that the fuselage has to be level,
I just mean that you have to hold altitude constant at whatever pressure
altitude corresponds a density altitude of 8000' on the day you measure the
numbers.
__
One more item, if you can give me the pitch and diameter of your prop, I will
do a little handicapping with a program that I have to see if I should apply a
correction for that. Bruce, you will have to estimate your pitch for me at the
settings that you come up with for the experiment.
__
Thanks much guys for all of your help on this project. I hope it will shed
some light on the aerodynamics of these little planes.

Cheers,
Jay -- Tri-Q still building



















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Jay Scheevel <scheevel@...>
 

OK,

After some thoughtful and reasoned input from a number of people I have come
to the conclusion that I am under selling the significance of the propeller
and other mods to the 0-200 engine (as well as other engines).
__
A simpler and more direct approach is required to try to isolate the effect
of only wing incidence on differently powered Q's. So I am suggesting a
simplified (from pilot perspective) scheme that will allow me to compute
some comparison numbers for each plane measured, regardless of powerplant or
propeller. Let's try this:
___
1. go to whatever altitude is 8000' density altitude on the day you test.
2. Set your throttle to the minimum that allows you to maintain a constant
altitude without pitch-bucking and record the rpm** and the airspeed (IAS).
3. Set your throttle to full power and stay level at 8000' DA. Note the
rpm** and airspeed (IAS).
4. set the throttle to whatever it takes in order to pitch-buck at a
constant altitude and record the rpm** and airspeed (IAS).
** if you have a constant speed prop, like Bruce, instead of recording rpm
settings, record manifold pressure for each of the above.
___
I think that with these measurements in hand, I can make some sense of the
relative performance, relating primarily to the impact of wing incidence.
___
Mitch had asked about what is pitch-buck. That is simply the stall speed for
the canard. Since the main wing does not stall, the canard stalls and
recovers repeatedly when the stick is held back at a low enough airspeed.
This stable maneuver is called the pitch-buck, and is essentially the
minimum airspeed of your Q.
__
One other consideration. I would like to get this all wrapped up before Dec.
4 in order to allow Doug to get it in the last Q-talk. If you can't make
your flight test before that I understand, and append my study whenever I
get your data. but if you can gather the flight test data before then, it
would make for a very complete study. Many thanks.

Cheers,
Jay Scheevel -- Tri-Q, still building and measuring (as annoying as that may
seem)


Jim Patillo
 

What about wind direction and velocity? To average a speed wouldn't you need to fly a triangle?

--- In Q-LIST@..., "Jay Scheevel" <scheevel@...> wrote:

OK,

After some thoughtful and reasoned input from a number of people I have come
to the conclusion that I am under selling the significance of the propeller
and other mods to the 0-200 engine (as well as other engines).
__
A simpler and more direct approach is required to try to isolate the effect
of only wing incidence on differently powered Q's. So I am suggesting a
simplified (from pilot perspective) scheme that will allow me to compute
some comparison numbers for each plane measured, regardless of powerplant or
propeller. Let's try this:
___
1. go to whatever altitude is 8000' density altitude on the day you test.
2. Set your throttle to the minimum that allows you to maintain a constant
altitude without pitch-bucking and record the rpm** and the airspeed (IAS).
3. Set your throttle to full power and stay level at 8000' DA. Note the
rpm** and airspeed (IAS).
4. set the throttle to whatever it takes in order to pitch-buck at a
constant altitude and record the rpm** and airspeed (IAS).
** if you have a constant speed prop, like Bruce, instead of recording rpm
settings, record manifold pressure for each of the above.
___
I think that with these measurements in hand, I can make some sense of the
relative performance, relating primarily to the impact of wing incidence.
___
Mitch had asked about what is pitch-buck. That is simply the stall speed for
the canard. Since the main wing does not stall, the canard stalls and
recovers repeatedly when the stick is held back at a low enough airspeed.
This stable maneuver is called the pitch-buck, and is essentially the
minimum airspeed of your Q.
__
One other consideration. I would like to get this all wrapped up before Dec.
4 in order to allow Doug to get it in the last Q-talk. If you can't make
your flight test before that I understand, and append my study whenever I
get your data. but if you can gather the flight test data before then, it
would make for a very complete study. Many thanks.

Cheers,
Jay Scheevel -- Tri-Q, still building and measuring (as annoying as that may
seem)


Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...>
 

I assume Jay is looking for IAS - read off the airspeed indicator. Not ground speed which is typically read from a GPS receiver. IAS would not be affected by wind, so we shouldn't need to fly a triangle.

At least that's how I interpreted what he was asking for!

- Paul

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of Jim P
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 11:56
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Putting Numbers with my Numbers



What about wind direction and velocity? To average a speed wouldn't you need to fly a triangle?

--- In Q-LIST@...<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>, "Jay Scheevel" <scheevel@...> wrote:

OK,

After some thoughtful and reasoned input from a number of people I have come
to the conclusion that I am under selling the significance of the propeller
and other mods to the 0-200 engine (as well as other engines).
__
A simpler and more direct approach is required to try to isolate the effect
of only wing incidence on differently powered Q's. So I am suggesting a
simplified (from pilot perspective) scheme that will allow me to compute
some comparison numbers for each plane measured, regardless of powerplant or
propeller. Let's try this:
___
1. go to whatever altitude is 8000' density altitude on the day you test.
2. Set your throttle to the minimum that allows you to maintain a constant
altitude without pitch-bucking and record the rpm** and the airspeed (IAS).
3. Set your throttle to full power and stay level at 8000' DA. Note the
rpm** and airspeed (IAS).
4. set the throttle to whatever it takes in order to pitch-buck at a
constant altitude and record the rpm** and airspeed (IAS).
** if you have a constant speed prop, like Bruce, instead of recording rpm
settings, record manifold pressure for each of the above.
___
I think that with these measurements in hand, I can make some sense of the
relative performance, relating primarily to the impact of wing incidence.
___
Mitch had asked about what is pitch-buck. That is simply the stall speed for
the canard. Since the main wing does not stall, the canard stalls and
recovers repeatedly when the stick is held back at a low enough airspeed.
This stable maneuver is called the pitch-buck, and is essentially the
minimum airspeed of your Q.
__
One other consideration. I would like to get this all wrapped up before Dec.
4 in order to allow Doug to get it in the last Q-talk. If you can't make
your flight test before that I understand, and append my study whenever I
get your data. but if you can gather the flight test data before then, it
would make for a very complete study. Many thanks.

Cheers,
Jay Scheevel -- Tri-Q, still building and measuring (as annoying as that may
seem)


Mike Dwyer <mdwyer@...>
 

IAS is notoriously bad tho. CAS (Calibrated air speed) is what you want. For instance, my IAS at high speed is 7 MPH higher than my CAS. Even tho I am not part of this test I don't understand what speed at pitch buck is. With no power my speed varies from 67 mph to about 75 in the pitching. With power on I can get down to 55 mph.
Mike Q200


Fisher Paul A. wrote:

I assume Jay is looking for IAS - read off the airspeed indicator. Not ground speed which is typically read from a GPS receiver. IAS would not be affected by wind, so we shouldn't need to fly a triangle.

At least that's how I interpreted what he was asking for!

- Paul

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of Jim P
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 11:56
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Putting Numbers with my Numbers



What about wind direction and velocity? To average a speed wouldn't you need to fly a triangle?

--- In Q-LIST@...<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>, "Jay Scheevel" <scheevel@...> wrote:

OK,

After some thoughtful and reasoned input from a number of people I have come
to the conclusion that I am under selling the significance of the propeller
and other mods to the 0-200 engine (as well as other engines).
__
A simpler and more direct approach is required to try to isolate the effect
of only wing incidence on differently powered Q's. So I am suggesting a
simplified (from pilot perspective) scheme that will allow me to compute
some comparison numbers for each plane measured, regardless of powerplant or
propeller. Let's try this:
___
1. go to whatever altitude is 8000' density altitude on the day you test.
2. Set your throttle to the minimum that allows you to maintain a constant
altitude without pitch-bucking and record the rpm** and the airspeed (IAS).
3. Set your throttle to full power and stay level at 8000' DA. Note the
rpm** and airspeed (IAS).
4. set the throttle to whatever it takes in order to pitch-buck at a
constant altitude and record the rpm** and airspeed (IAS).
** if you have a constant speed prop, like Bruce, instead of recording rpm
settings, record manifold pressure for each of the above.
___
I think that with these measurements in hand, I can make some sense of the
relative performance, relating primarily to the impact of wing incidence.
___
Mitch had asked about what is pitch-buck. That is simply the stall speed for
the canard. Since the main wing does not stall, the canard stalls and
recovers repeatedly when the stick is held back at a low enough airspeed.
This stable maneuver is called the pitch-buck, and is essentially the
minimum airspeed of your Q.
__
One other consideration. I would like to get this all wrapped up before Dec.
4 in order to allow Doug to get it in the last Q-talk. If you can't make
your flight test before that I understand, and append my study whenever I
get your data. but if you can gather the flight test data before then, it
would make for a very complete study. Many thanks.

Cheers,
Jay Scheevel -- Tri-Q, still building and measuring (as annoying as that may
seem)






------------------------------------

Quickie Builders Association WEB site
http://www.quickiebuilders.org

Yahoo! Groups Links





Jim Patillo
 

Sounds right Paul but with IAS, isn't he relying on instruments that may or may not be calibrated correctly? Doesn't that add more varible? Just thinking out loud...........

JP

--- In Q-LIST@..., Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...> wrote:

I assume Jay is looking for IAS - read off the airspeed indicator. Not ground speed which is typically read from a GPS receiver. IAS would not be affected by wind, so we shouldn't need to fly a triangle.

At least that's how I interpreted what he was asking for!

- Paul

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of Jim P
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 11:56
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Putting Numbers with my Numbers



What about wind direction and velocity? To average a speed wouldn't you need to fly a triangle?

--- In Q-LIST@...<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>, "Jay Scheevel" <scheevel@> wrote:

OK,

After some thoughtful and reasoned input from a number of people I have come
to the conclusion that I am under selling the significance of the propeller
and other mods to the 0-200 engine (as well as other engines).
__
A simpler and more direct approach is required to try to isolate the effect
of only wing incidence on differently powered Q's. So I am suggesting a
simplified (from pilot perspective) scheme that will allow me to compute
some comparison numbers for each plane measured, regardless of powerplant or
propeller. Let's try this:
___
1. go to whatever altitude is 8000' density altitude on the day you test.
2. Set your throttle to the minimum that allows you to maintain a constant
altitude without pitch-bucking and record the rpm** and the airspeed (IAS).
3. Set your throttle to full power and stay level at 8000' DA. Note the
rpm** and airspeed (IAS).
4. set the throttle to whatever it takes in order to pitch-buck at a
constant altitude and record the rpm** and airspeed (IAS).
** if you have a constant speed prop, like Bruce, instead of recording rpm
settings, record manifold pressure for each of the above.
___
I think that with these measurements in hand, I can make some sense of the
relative performance, relating primarily to the impact of wing incidence.
___
Mitch had asked about what is pitch-buck. That is simply the stall speed for
the canard. Since the main wing does not stall, the canard stalls and
recovers repeatedly when the stick is held back at a low enough airspeed.
This stable maneuver is called the pitch-buck, and is essentially the
minimum airspeed of your Q.
__
One other consideration. I would like to get this all wrapped up before Dec.
4 in order to allow Doug to get it in the last Q-talk. If you can't make
your flight test before that I understand, and append my study whenever I
get your data. but if you can gather the flight test data before then, it
would make for a very complete study. Many thanks.

Cheers,
Jay Scheevel -- Tri-Q, still building and measuring (as annoying as that may
seem)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Patrick Panzera <panzera@...>
 

For what it's worth, the August issue of Experimenter has two really good
articles on understanding and finding true and calibrated airspeed.

http://www.eaa.org/experimenter/issues/0908.html

Pat

-----Original Message-----
From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of
Mike Dwyer
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 12:47 PM
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: Re: [Q-LIST] Re: Putting Numbers with my Numbers

IAS is notoriously bad tho. CAS (Calibrated air speed) is what you
want. For instance, my IAS at high speed is 7 MPH higher than my CAS.
Even tho I am not part of this test I don't understand what speed at
pitch buck is. With no power my speed varies from 67 mph to about 75 in
the pitching. With power on I can get down to 55 mph.
Mike Q200


Jay Scheevel <scheevel@...>
 

Hi Guys,

Any additional information information that you want to give me on airspeed
will be fine. I was assuming that IAS and CAS were close enough in most of
your pitot placements to neglect, so I was asking for IAS to simplify the
test. If this is not the case, then please give me CAS numbers. (By the way,
TAS is not relevant because the tests will all be performed at 8000' DA so
IAS/CAS numbers will be directly comparable).
__
Jim, Paul was correct in that I am comparing aerodynamic performance, so
simple airspeed numbers will be adequate to do this.
__
Mike Dwyer's question concerning pitch-buck speed, please give me the
pitch-buck speed at whatever power setting it takes to keep from losing
altitude at 8000' DA. Give me the minimum speed that you observe in the
pitch-buck maneuver (i.e. The stall speed of the canard) This will be a good
number for me to compare relative lift from each surface.
__
Also, I did not suggest a CG target, because each plane varies in this
regard, but if the CG at 1000# GW could be as close to the middle of the
range, that would also help me out.
__
Thanks guys for your questions and your help.

Cheers,
Jay -- Tri-Q, still building.


Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...>
 

I agree. I think there are a lot of variables like instrument errors, reflexor setting, engine, prop, etc. Jay's trying to get some data, and I'd like to help him, but I'm not sure how we can eliminate all of the variables...

However, in the interest of science, here's what I got today. Do what you like with it!

Altitude 7670; altimeter setting 30.14, 45F - calculated density altitude - 8009 feet.

Level w/o pitch buck - 1800RPM; 85MPH IAS

Level at full throttle - 2510 RPM; 162MPH IAS

Level pitch buck - 1900 RPM; 78MPH IAS

Prop: Ed Sterba 60"x68"

I hope that helps!

Paul A. Fisher
Q-200, N17PF

From: Q-LIST@... [mailto:Q-LIST@...] On Behalf Of Jim P
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 15:24
To: Q-LIST@...
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Putting Numbers with my Numbers



Sounds right Paul but with IAS, isn't he relying on instruments that may or may not be calibrated correctly? Doesn't that add more varible? Just thinking out loud...........

JP

--- In Q-LIST@...<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>, Fisher Paul A. <fisherpaula@...> wrote:

I assume Jay is looking for IAS - read off the airspeed indicator. Not ground speed which is typically read from a GPS receiver. IAS would not be affected by wind, so we shouldn't need to fly a triangle.

At least that's how I interpreted what he was asking for!

- Paul

From: Q-LIST@...<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:Q-LIST@...<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Jim P
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 11:56
To: Q-LIST@...<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Q-LIST] Re: Putting Numbers with my Numbers



What about wind direction and velocity? To average a speed wouldn't you need to fly a triangle?

--- In Q-LIST@...<mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:Q-LIST%40yahoogroups.com>, "Jay Scheevel" <scheevel@> wrote:

OK,

After some thoughtful and reasoned input from a number of people I have come
to the conclusion that I am under selling the significance of the propeller
and other mods to the 0-200 engine (as well as other engines).
__
A simpler and more direct approach is required to try to isolate the effect
of only wing incidence on differently powered Q's. So I am suggesting a
simplified (from pilot perspective) scheme that will allow me to compute
some comparison numbers for each plane measured, regardless of powerplant or
propeller. Let's try this:
___
1. go to whatever altitude is 8000' density altitude on the day you test.
2. Set your throttle to the minimum that allows you to maintain a constant
altitude without pitch-bucking and record the rpm** and the airspeed (IAS).
3. Set your throttle to full power and stay level at 8000' DA. Note the
rpm** and airspeed (IAS).
4. set the throttle to whatever it takes in order to pitch-buck at a
constant altitude and record the rpm** and airspeed (IAS).
** if you have a constant speed prop, like Bruce, instead of recording rpm
settings, record manifold pressure for each of the above.
___
I think that with these measurements in hand, I can make some sense of the
relative performance, relating primarily to the impact of wing incidence.
___
Mitch had asked about what is pitch-buck. That is simply the stall speed for
the canard. Since the main wing does not stall, the canard stalls and
recovers repeatedly when the stick is held back at a low enough airspeed.
This stable maneuver is called the pitch-buck, and is essentially the
minimum airspeed of your Q.
__
One other consideration. I would like to get this all wrapped up before Dec.
4 in order to allow Doug to get it in the last Q-talk. If you can't make
your flight test before that I understand, and append my study whenever I
get your data. but if you can gather the flight test data before then, it
would make for a very complete study. Many thanks.

Cheers,
Jay Scheevel -- Tri-Q, still building and measuring (as annoying as that may
seem)




kr2flyer1986
 

Jay here are my numbers


Altitude 8000; altimeter setting 29.93 , 40F.

Level w/o pitch buck - 1600 RPM; 75 MPH IAS

Level at full throttle - 2700 RPM; 150 MPH IAS

Level pitch buck - 1000 RPM; 68MPH IAS

Prop: Ed Sterba 60"x68"




Bob Clark
Tri-Q 0-200
96 Hours
Ankeny Iowa