Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Test Flight Results

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 10:48 am Post subject: Test Flight Results

We just finished test flying, including the  most recent flight at full aft CG and gross weight.  I put the plane on  scales to load it so I know it was right at the limit.  It took 200 lbs in  the baggage area, 200 in the rear seats, and 400 lbs of pilots to get to aft  C.G. at gross.  Considering that the normal baggage limit is 150#, I think  you'd have to try pretty hard to overload the plane or load it out of C.G.   Still worth checking though.

  

 At aft C.G. and gross weight we did approach  stalls, zero G manuvers to calibrate the AOA, slow flight, and cruise.   Climb on a cool day from sea level was near 1800FPM.   Handling was normal athough the stalls seemed to break more abrubtly than  when it was light (at 2200 lbs it didn't really break at all, just  "mushed").  Heavy, it was still a very easy recovery just by adding  power.

  

 This was the first cruise measurement we've  made since installing the gear fairings.  We saw the standard 15 kt  increase.  At 5000', gross weight, 24" and 2500 RPM we saw 177KTAS.   We're RV grinning from ear to ear!

  

 With the fairings installed we're at 1588  lbs. empty.  Still no paint or interior.  I told the interior  shop his budget was 8 pounds.  He just laughed...

  

  Dave Saylor

 AirCrafters LLC

 140 Aviation Way

 Watsonville, CA 

 831-722-9141

 831-750-0284 CL

 www.AirCraftersLLC.com



  

  

    [quote][b]

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2881

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 11:10 am Post subject: Test Flight Results

Awesome, glad to see someone posting numbers!  Have you calibrated

out the airspeed by doing the 3-way or 4-way GPS runs yet?

How was the static port error if any, if you have?



What RPM are you getting 1800FPM with for climb on a cool day

at sea level.  Climbing at 2650 should bring close to 22-2300 if

you're flying alone, and full-up I can usually manage 15-1600fpm.

But, by reducing the RPM down to what some people climb at

(2500), it does reduce climb probably to about where you're

at, so I'm just wondering what the situation was around that

climb rate.



Makes it really worth adding the fairings, doesn't it!?!

Sounds like at full MP and the right load balances you'll

have no problem getting right up to Van's posted numbers!

I find aircraft loading, and many factors seem to affect

the absolute top end from flight to flight.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Dave Saylor wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   We just finished test flying, including the most recent flight at full 

 aft CG and gross weight.  I put the plane on scales to load it so I know 

 it was right at the limit.  It took 200 lbs in the baggage area, 200 in 

 the rear seats, and 400 lbs of pilots to get to aft C.G. at gross.  

 Considering that the normal baggage limit is 150#, I think you'd have to 

 try pretty hard to overload the plane or load it out of C.G.  Still 

 worth checking though.

  

 At aft C.G. and gross weight we did approach stalls, zero G manuvers to 

 calibrate the AOA, slow flight, and cruise.  Climb on a cool 

 day from sea level was near 1800FPM.  Handling was normal athough the 

 stalls seemed to break more abrubtly than when it was light (at 2200 lbs 

 it didn't really break at all, just "mushed").  Heavy, it was still a 

 very easy recovery just by adding power.

  

 This was the first cruise measurement we've made since installing the 

 gear fairings.  We saw the standard 15 kt increase.  At 5000', gross 

 weight, 24" and 2500 RPM we saw 177KTAS.  We're RV grinning from ear to ear!

  

 With the fairings installed we're at 1588 lbs. empty.  Still no paint or 

 interior.  I told the interior shop his budget was 8 pounds.  He just 

 laughed...

  

 Dave Saylor

 AirCrafters LLC

 140 Aviation Way

 Watsonville, CA

 831-722-9141

 831-750-0284 CL

 www.AirCraftersLLC.com

bcondrey

Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 580

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 11:57 am Post subject: Re: Test Flight Results

Dave,



Are you using a 2700 lb gross weight?



Bob

Phil.Perry(at)netapp.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:04 pm Post subject: Test Flight Results

Good report, Dave.

  

 I might print that one off and hang it inside the  shop.  That'll keep me focused on building.  

  

  



   From: Dave Saylor  [mailto:Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007  12:50 PM

To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: RV10-List:  Test Flight Results

 

 We just finished test flying, including the  most recent flight at full aft CG and gross weight.  I put the plane on  scales to load it so I know it was right at the limit.  It took 200 lbs in  the baggage area, 200 in the rear seats, and 400 lbs of pilots to get to aft  C.G. at gross.  Considering that the normal baggage limit is 150#, I think  you'd have to try pretty hard to overload the plane or load it out of C.G.   Still worth checking though.

  

 At aft C.G. and gross weight we did approach  stalls, zero G manuvers to calibrate the AOA, slow flight, and cruise.   Climb on a cool day from sea level was near 1800FPM.   Handling was normal athough the stalls seemed to break more abrubtly than  when it was light (at 2200 lbs it didn't really break at all, just  "mushed").  Heavy, it was still a very easy recovery just by adding  power.

  

 This was the first cruise measurement we've  made since installing the gear fairings.  We saw the standard 15 kt  increase.  At 5000', gross weight, 24" and 2500 RPM we saw 177KTAS.   We're RV grinning from ear to ear!

  

 With the fairings installed we're at 1588  lbs. empty.  Still no paint or interior.  I told the interior  shop his budget was 8 pounds.  He just laughed...

  

  Dave Saylor

 AirCrafters LLC

 140 Aviation Way

 Watsonville, CA 

 831-722-9141

 831-750-0284 CL

 www.AirCraftersLLC.com



  

  

[quote]



href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/chref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List

href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com



[b]

Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:30 pm Post subject: Test Flight Results

Yep, 2700.

Do Not Archive 



--

Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:30 pm Post subject: Test Flight Results

Yep, I checked the calibration of the indicator with GPS.  I compensated

for wind by using the wind vector indicator on the EFIS and flying into,

away from, and perpendicular to the wind, and checking IAS against GS.  I

was pretty surprised to see that my first try at static ports was accurate

enough to call 'em good.  I used a gigantic pop rivet, then threaded a brass

screw into the stem and drilled a #60 hole through the screw.  Sounds

complicated but it only took about 10 minutes.



RPM is 2700 or 2720 depending on where the governor settles down.  I was

pretty happy with 1800 FPM at gross.  More like you're seeing when it's

light.



We're driving 300 miles for Thanksgiving this year because the plane will be

in paint but I'm really looking forward to some extended cruising to sort

out more power settings, loading, etc.



Dave Saylor

AirCrafters LLC

140 Aviation Way

Watsonville, CA 

831-722-9141

831-750-0284 CL

www.AirCraftersLLC.com

do not archive

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2881

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 2:22 pm Post subject: Test Flight Results

Awesome, then them's is good numbers you got there.  1800fpm is

pretty good for full gross.  I've never flown out of sea level

before, especially on a cool day, so I don't know exactly what I'd

have, but, it sounds like you're definitely going to be on the

well performing side of the pile. You should be pretty happy with

your cruise speeds, that's for sure.



Thanks for doing the good work getting accurate numbers to report.

I'm sure the pop-rivet static port style should give less error

than some of the other options, as it sticks out further.

I think you probably solved one of the down sides though by adding

the screw...gives more for the hose/tubing to grip to than just a

pop rivet alone.  Good work all the way around.



When you get some purdy pictures, send 'em on!



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Dave Saylor wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   

 

  Yep, I checked the calibration of the indicator with GPS.  I compensated

 for wind by using the wind vector indicator on the EFIS and flying into,

 away from, and perpendicular to the wind, and checking IAS against GS.  I

 was pretty surprised to see that my first try at static ports was accurate

 enough to call 'em good.  I used a gigantic pop rivet, then threaded a brass

 screw into the stem and drilled a #60 hole through the screw.  Sounds

 complicated but it only took about 10 minutes.

 

 RPM is 2700 or 2720 depending on where the governor settles down.  I was

 pretty happy with 1800 FPM at gross.  More like you're seeing when it's

 light.

 

 We're driving 300 miles for Thanksgiving this year because the plane will be

 in paint but I'm really looking forward to some extended cruising to sort

 out more power settings, loading, etc.

 

 Dave Saylor

 AirCrafters LLC

 140 Aviation Way

 Watsonville, CA 

 831-722-9141

 831-750-0284 CL

 www.AirCraftersLLC.com

 do not archive

scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 3:33 pm Post subject: Test Flight Results

At Nellis, the most asked question on Saturday and Sunday was, "Does this plane really cruise at 170 knots like the ad says?"

I probably got this question about 6 times and I'm sure everyone else wondered the same.  

I told them it does and it will do more depending on how much fuel you want to burn.  It is funny that people don't believe it.  

Now at gross weight and cruising at 10,500 - 12,500 ft.  I get about 160 - 162 knots, but if I went lower and pushed my fuel burn up to 14-15 gph, no problem.  



177 knots is awesome.   I will have to load the plane up someday and scoot across the ground at 800 agl (5000 ft.) and see what type of speed I can get.  



Here are a couple more shots just to prove that this plane will cruise at 170  knots.  Here I am running ROP at 12.5 gph at 11,500.  The TAS is 171 knots. 

I should tell people the ad lies, it is actually faster than that.  



 

As long as I'm attaching photos here is one more. I had the most amazing flight about 3 weeks ago.  There was a thin cloud layer at 11,000 ft., the sun was setting and I was flying towards the tallest peak along the Wasatch Front.  Of course I did not have my camera, but I did have my iPhone with me so at least I got a shot.  You can imagine what a good camera would have taken.  I was alone and was wishing at least my wife was with me.  To this day, it was one of the best flights ever.  The picture is looking down what is called Provo Canyon.  One flight like that after all the work you put into your RV-10 makes it worth it.  I feel like I have been paid back and should start again.

Every flight you take you feel like you won't  be able to top the beauty of a certain sunrise, sunset, cloud layer, ect... but then it will.    

Scott Schmidt

scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com



---

panel1.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

46.52 KB

Viewed:

309 Time(s)

Panel2.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

81.39 KB

Viewed:

272 Time(s)

photo(2).jpg

Description:

Filesize:

36.38 KB

Viewed:

282 Time(s)

Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 7:01 pm Post subject: Test Flight Results

177 seems kind of high to  me, but that's what EFIS said and I'm as sure as 45 hours of experience can make  me that it's right.  I wonder if having a lot of nose down trim was a  factor.  I've heard that being tail heavy is more efficient because it  unloads the main wing, but then again the lift (and induced drag) has to come  from somewhere, even if it's from the tail.

  

 I dunno.  I'm  anxious to get out there and get some more data, and see some cool stuff like  those mountains, Scott.

  

 Dave Saylor

 AirCrafters LLC

 140 Aviation Way

 Watsonville, CA 

 831-722-9141

 831-750-0284 CL

 www.AirCraftersLLC.com

  

 Do Not Archive



   From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com  [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott  Schmidt

Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 3:33 PM

To:  rv10-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Test Flight  Results

 

 At  Nellis, the most asked question on Saturday and Sunday was, "Does this plane  really cruise at 170 knots like the ad says?"

I probably got this question  about 6 times and I'm sure everyone else wondered the same.  

I told  them it does and it will do more depending on how much fuel you want to  burn.  It is funny that people don't believe it.  

Now at gross  weight and cruising at 10,500 - 12,500 ft.  I get about 160 - 162 knots,  but if I went lower and pushed my fuel burn up to 14-15 gph, no problem.   



177 knots is awesome.   I will have to load the plane up  someday and scoot across the ground at 800 agl (5000 ft.) and see what type of  speed I can get.  



Here are a couple more shots just to prove that  this plane will cruise at 170 knots.  Here I am running ROP at 12.5 gph at  11,500.  The TAS is 171 knots. 

I should tell people the ad lies, it is  actually faster than that.  



 

As long as I'm attaching photos here is one more. I had the most  amazing flight about 3 weeks ago.  There was a thin cloud layer at 11,000  ft., the sun was setting and I was flying towards the tallest peak along the  Wasatch Front.  Of course I did not have my camera, but I did have my  iPhone with me so at least I got a shot.  You can imagine what a good  camera would have taken.  I was alone and was wishing at least my wife was  with me.  To this day, it was one of the best flights ever.  The  picture is looking down what is called Provo Canyon.  One flight like that  after all the work you put into your RV-10 makes it worth it.  I feel like  I have been paid back and should start again.

Every flight you take you feel  like you won't be able to top the beauty of a certain sunrise, sunset, cloud  layer, ect... but then it will.   

Scott  Schmidt

scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com 



 -----  Original Message ----

From: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com>

To:  rv10-list(at)matronics.com

Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 3:22:11  PM

Subject: Re: Test Flight Results



--> RV10-List  message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim(at)MyRV10.com (Tim(at)MyRV10.com)>



Awesome, then  them's is good numbers you got there.  1800fpm is

pretty good for full  gross.  I've never flown out of sea level

before, especially on a cool  day, so I don't know exactly what I'd

have, but, it sounds like you're  definitely going to be on the

well performing side of the pile. You should be  pretty happy with

your cruise speeds, that's for sure.



Thanks for  doing the good work getting accurate numbers to report.

I'm sure the  pop-rivet static port style should give less error

than some of the other  options, as it sticks out further.

I think you probably solved one of the  down sides though by adding

the screw...gives more for the hose/tubing to  grip to than just a

pop rivet alone.  Good work all the way  around.



When you get some purdy pictures, send 'em on!



Tim Olson -  RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Dave Saylor wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		    --> RV10-List message posted by: "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)aircraftersllc.com (Dave(at)aircraftersllc.com)>

  

  Yep, I checked the calibration of the indicator with GPS.  I  compensated

 for wind by using the wind vector indicator on the EFIS and  flying into,

 away from, and perpendicular to the wind, and checking IAS  against GS.  I

 was pretty surprised to see that my first try at  static ports was accurate

 enough to call 'em good.  I used a  gigantic pop rivet, then threaded a brass

 screw into the stem and  drilled a #60 hole through the screw.  Sounds

 complicated but it  only took about 10 minutes.

 

 RPM is 2700 or 2720 depending on  where the governor settles down.  I was

 pretty happy with 1800 FPM  at gross.  More like you're seeing when it's

 light.

  

 We're driving 300 miles for Thanksgiving this year because the plane  will be

 in paint but I'm really looking forward to some extended  cruising to


	




    [quote][b]

Tim Olson

Joined: 25 Jan 2007
Posts: 2881

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 7:46 pm Post subject: Test Flight Results

I think you'll find that adding some weight aft will add to your speeds.

Also, getting the magic 183kts is kind of a mystery, but it's doable.

It will depend on lots of factors like altitude, weather, and everything

else.  I know, without a doubt, that I've seen 183 and even 185kts TAS

flat out before.  The problem is, that was in the winter, at maybe

2500', with higher RPM's and plenty of fuel being poured on....maybe

24gph or so.



Realistically, you will probably find if you're a medium altitude flyer,

you can probably manage 170-172 kts TAS in cruise, at maybe 14gph.

Notice that Scott quoted in the 160's, ROP but with lesser fuel flows

than that, but, Scott's altitudes were higher than some of the legs

I've done too.  I've had legs at 14k where I was in the mid 150's LOP

and that's all I've managed.  I can USUALLY, if I cruise 7000-10,000',

count on a minimum of 155kts LOP, and more likely 160-165kts LOP, and

over 170kts ROP.  But if I get too high, I'll maybe drop down in

the 155-160kt range.  On the good side, on legs of 13K' or so, I'll

usually get LOP and be down in the 8.5gph range (at) 155kts TAS.



So really, all I'm saying is, yeah, the -10 will make Van's numbers

no problem.  But, you're probably not going to ever cruise at any of

the top speeds, and there are so many variables that it's going to

take more than a couple long X/C flights for you to find some of the

various combinations that work well.  You may find that you do

one thing up high, one thing in the middle, and a totally different

thing down low.



For me, the biggest thrill has been the benefits of running LOP with

a good engine monitor.  It's amazing, but I can even cruise around

at 125kts indicated while at 3000' or so, and get the fuel flow down

to about 7gph....so it'll do better than a cessna for your local

sightseeing too if you want it to.



Oh, and last week, when Scott took my kids and had more in the

back, he seemed significantly faster than me and my wife alone in

our plane.  But at OSH, he only seemed about 2-3kts faster.  So I'm

guessing loading played a factor in that.



One thing I'd love to hear from you after you get some cruising done

is what your favorite RPM is.  So far I've heard from at least

2 RV-10 builders, with 2 different props, who both like the feel

of 2360rpm.  Not 2350, not 2370...it's very interesting to me that

some of us can find some of these same sweet spots, and I'm wondering

if there are more who find that and we don't even know.



Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying

do not archive

Dave Saylor wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   177 seems kind of high to me, but that's what EFIS said and I'm as sure 

 as 45 hours of experience can make me that it's right.  I wonder if 

 having a lot of nose down trim was a factor.  I've heard that being tail 

 heavy is more efficient because it unloads the main wing, but then again 

 the lift (and induced drag) has to come from somewhere, even if it's 

 from the tail.

  

 I dunno.  I'm anxious to get out there and get some more data, and see 

 some cool stuff like those mountains, Scott.

  

 Dave Saylor

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

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