 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kirk Smith
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 78
Location: SE Michigan
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 1:15 pm Post subject: full enclosures |
 |
|
| Quote: |
And then you would get EGT's of incredible weirdness. Hot weirdness.
|
That's true.
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Don G
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 156
Location: Central Illinois
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 7:29 am Post subject: Re: full enclosures |
|
|
Rob,
IT has been my experience that firefly built to conform to the part 103 requirements by "Calculation" will still exceed the top speed limitation with a 447 unless you specifically underprop the aircraft. I can assure you that if you build it with no streamlineing and no enclosure and stick a prop that will limit the engine to around 6000 to 6200 or so static rpm that it will readily fly fast enough to exceed the part 103 top speed. So the "calculations" are not that accurate anyway. The question really is, do you want it to comply by calculation, or by real world performance numbers.
If you build it with all the streamlineing you can..a full enclosure, and brakes and even heavy and so on, adjust the prop to make the best rpm at 6500 or so WOT straight and level, it will run out around 85 to 90 mph.(447/60 inch)
IF you dont fool with any extra drag reduction like leg fairings and struts and such...and build it without a full enclosure, you will have an airplane that will be uncomfortable to fly at anything other than a low rpm cruise unless you have a really strong neck. ( and still fly too fast for compliance)
The laid back seating position makes your neck hurt when holding your head against the wind.
Of all the things I did to my FlagFly the full enclosure is the last thing I would ever remove due to simple pilot comfort.
IN reference to the ramp check question, the only time I ever was, was back in 1977, in Oklahoma, Flying a Spartan School of Aeronautics 150, while on a cross country flight during private pilot training. I believe the FAA agent simply waited for any plane to land with the school logo on the tail to check the students paperwork, which was always up to snuff because the school always kept it up. I have always thought that they were just "flexing" their muscles to intimidate, maybe make a student believe that this was the norm for the future.
Never have been checked since....lessee...wow...almost 30 years..egad!
Feeling old all of a sudden!
Don
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
_________________
Don G.
Central Illinois
Kitfox IV Speedster
Luscombe 8A
RV9A |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbhart(at)onlyinternet.ne
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 1:09 pm Post subject: full enclosures |
|
|
At 08:29 AM 6/16/06 -0700, you wrote:
| Quote: |
Rob,
IT has been my experience that firefly built to conform to the part 103 requirements by "Calculation" will still exceed the top speed limitation with a 447 unless you specifically underprop the aircraft. I can assure you that if you build it with no streamlineing and no enclosure and stick a prop that will limit the engine to around 6000 to 6200 or so static rpm that it will readily fly fast enough to exceed the part 103 top speed. So the "calculations" are not that accurate anyway. The question really is, do you want it to comply by calculation, or by real world performance numbers.
............................
|
FireFlyers
The neat thing about the calculations is that they allow you to provide
definitive proof that your FireFly meets all AC 103-7 requirements to be
called an ultralight. And better yet a document copy made up of AC 103-7
Appendix 1, 2, 3 & 4 is considered to be sufficient proof that a FireFly
meets all requirments. As long as your FireFly's weight is under 254
pounds, fuel tank is no more than five gallons, and your computed drag
factor is not less than 11.8 and your engine hp no more than 38, you can fly
it as fast as it will go and it is legal.
You can make changes where they are not specifically prohibited. For
example, strut drag does not say that struts have to be round, therefore you
can streamline them etc. You can feather all trailing edges of the wings
and tail feathers.
If you make changes that reduce the computed drag factor to less than 11.8,
engine hp has to be reduced to make ultralight requirements.
If you have not seen the document, an example can be seen at:
http://www.thirdshift.com/jack/firefly/fireflylegal.html
Jack B. Hart FF004
Winchester, IN
| | - The Matronics Kolb-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Kolb-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
