A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Low test numbers on Standard Cirrus, what could it be?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 11th 11, 02:59 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
akiley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Low test numbers on Standard Cirrus, what could it be?

Hi All,

I'm fairly new to soaring, but thought it might be fun to test our clubs Standard Cirrus to see if it was getting advertised L/D. I jumped in with not enough understanding of all the factors that effect performance, other than reading how Dick Johnson does his tests.

I took a tow to 6000 agl on a calm early morning when ground temps were about 70f. I raised the gear, closed both vents and flew one minute legs after I stabilized the IAS at 40, 50, 60 and 70 KIAS. Then I turned in the opposite direction and flew the series again. I video taped the gauges and got an IGC file from SeeYou/iPaq.

I did NOT factor temps and didn't compute calibrated airspeed. My average of both directions at each speed gave me: 26 L/D at 40 KIAS, 26.5 at 50, 28 at 60, and 25 at 70. These numbers seem to be very low for a Standard Cirrus. Johnson's results were in the neighborhood of 35 L/D. It had no bugs, wing root tape, and yes, the gear was up.

Any comments or ideas other than sending me back to school? ... Aaron
  #2  
Old August 11th 11, 03:37 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bastoune
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 77
Default Low test numbers on Standard Cirrus, what could it be?

Aaron,

A couple of questions regarding the approach used: For the
calculation, did you use the GPS distance and GPS altitude to
calculate the L/D ratio? The altitude reading of the GPS may not give
you the tolerance needed on such a short run. You should loose only
approximately ~150 feet on a minute run at 50kts. This is not much. I
do not know the tolerance on altitude of GPS except that I undertand
that they are often poor. Extending the length of the run (2-3
minutes) may reduce the height measurement errors.

If you used the altimeter, did you have a vibrating gizmo attached to
the case to "free" the needle? My altimeter only moves 100feet at a
time when left to its own...

As for the distance covered, the GPS again my throw things off if
there was some wind. If the run was up and then down the down, the
wind factor could be eliminated from the calculation. If it was a side
wind, it would be very difficult to extract.

No real answer but perhaps areas to explore. Good luck.

Bastoune
  #3  
Old August 11th 11, 04:29 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Eric Greenwell[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,939
Default Low test numbers on Standard Cirrus, what could it be?

On 8/10/2011 6:59 PM, akiley wrote:
Hi All,

I'm fairly new to soaring, but thought it might be fun to test our
clubs Standard Cirrus to see if it was getting advertised L/D. I
jumped in with not enough understanding of all the factors that
effect performance, other than reading how Dick Johnson does his
tests.

I took a tow to 6000 agl on a calm early morning when ground temps
were about 70f. I raised the gear, closed both vents and flew one
minute legs after I stabilized the IAS at 40, 50, 60 and 70 KIAS.
Then I turned in the opposite direction and flew the series again. I
video taped the gauges and got an IGC file from SeeYou/iPaq.

I did NOT factor temps and didn't compute calibrated airspeed. My
average of both directions at each speed gave me: 26 L/D at 40 KIAS,
26.5 at 50, 28 at 60, and 25 at 70. These numbers seem to be very
low for a Standard Cirrus. Johnson's results were in the
neighborhood of 35 L/D. It had no bugs, wing root tape, and yes, the
gear was up.

Any comments or ideas other than sending me back to school? ...


A 500' drop is a much more common number. With 1 minute runs at best
L/D, you will be dropping about 120 feet, too small to measure accurately.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
  #4  
Old August 11th 11, 06:31 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Alan[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 163
Default Low test numbers on Standard Cirrus, what could it be?

In article writes:
Hi All,

I'm fairly new to soaring, but thought it might be fun to test our clubs St=
andard Cirrus to see if it was getting advertised L/D. I jumped in with no=
t enough understanding of all the factors that effect performance, other th=
an reading how Dick Johnson does his tests.

I took a tow to 6000 agl on a calm early morning when ground temps were abo=
ut 70f. I raised the gear, closed both vents and flew one minute legs afte=
r I stabilized the IAS at 40, 50, 60 and 70 KIAS. Then I turned in the opp=
osite direction and flew the series again. I video taped the gauges and go=
t an IGC file from SeeYou/iPaq.

I did NOT factor temps and didn't compute calibrated airspeed. My average o=
f both directions at each speed gave me: 26 L/D at 40 KIAS, 26.5 at 50, 28 =
at 60, and 25 at 70. These numbers seem to be very low for a Standard Cirr=
us. Johnson's results were in the neighborhood of 35 L/D. It had no bugs,=
wing root tape, and yes, the gear was up.

Any comments or ideas other than sending me back to school? ... Aaron



Well, doing it in both directions probably didn't have much effect, since
you were doing it with airspeed, not groundspeed.

The suggestion that you do it for a greater time, such as 500 feet of
altitude, seems good. Since you don't have an engine vibrating the altimeter,
you need to tap it to ensure it isn't lagging behind from minor friction.

Even so, your results will be affected by air motion -- not horizontal wind,
as you are moving with that -- but vertical motion. If you are in an area of
sink, your results will be worse. If in an area of lift, you may get some
really great looking results!

To get an idea of how you did, plot the sink rate polar from your results.
Then compare those points with the published results. I would expect that you
may find an approximate vertical offset showing higher sink rates (shifting
the graph down), if you were testing in sink.

Alan
  #5  
Old August 11th 11, 03:53 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
aerodyne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 63
Default Low test numbers on Standard Cirrus, what could it be?

If you want another set of data, take a look at this video I made of
the Open Cirrus. All the instruments were calibrated, you can see the
30 sec digital averager on the panel top, the timer on the lower left
with the altimeter will give you a timed measurement, and the Winter
on the left is a 2 min averager. This flight is on OLC if you want
the GPS data.

I don't have time to comment on you results, except to say reread the
Johnson and Bikel articles on test measurement.

http://www.youtube.com/user/aerodyne.../2/GJLeuUYbWdM

aerodyne

  #6  
Old August 11th 11, 04:07 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
akiley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Low test numbers on Standard Cirrus, what could it be?

On Aug 11, 1:31*am, (Alan) wrote:
In article writes:
Hi All,


I'm fairly new to soaring, but thought it might be fun to test our clubs St=
andard Cirrus to see if it was getting advertised L/D. *I jumped in with no=
t enough understanding of all the factors that effect performance, other th=
an reading how Dick Johnson does his tests.


I took a tow to 6000 agl on a calm early morning when ground temps were abo=
ut 70f. *I raised the gear, closed both vents and flew one minute legs afte=
r I stabilized the IAS at 40, 50, 60 and 70 KIAS. *Then I turned in the opp=
osite direction and flew the series again. *I video taped the gauges and go=
t an IGC file from SeeYou/iPaq.


I did NOT factor temps and didn't compute calibrated airspeed. My average o=
f both directions at each speed gave me: 26 L/D at 40 KIAS, 26.5 at 50, 28 =
at 60, and 25 at 70. *These numbers seem to be very low for a Standard Cirr=
us. *Johnson's results were in the neighborhood of 35 L/D. *It had no bugs,=
wing root tape, and yes, the gear was up.


Any comments or ideas other than sending me back to school? *... Aaron


* Well, doing it in both directions probably didn't have much effect, since
you were doing it with airspeed, not groundspeed.

* The suggestion that you do it for a greater time, such as 500 feet of
altitude, seems good. *Since you don't have an engine vibrating the altimeter,
you need to tap it to ensure it isn't lagging behind from minor friction.

* Even so, your results will be affected by air motion -- not horizontal wind,
as you are moving with that -- but vertical motion. *If you are in an area of
sink, your results will be worse. *If in an area of lift, you may get some
really great looking results!

* To get an idea of how you did, plot the sink rate polar from your results.
Then compare those points with the published results. *I would expect that you
may find an approximate vertical offset showing higher sink rates (shifting
the graph down), if you were testing in sink.

* * * * Alan


Thanks for the help. The longer sample makes sense. I forgot to
mention, I also had a Garmin 396 with WASS so altitude should have
been closer. After looking at the Garmin numbers, it was father off
from the iPaq/SeeYou and the panel altimeter. After a rough graph,
The slower speeds were consistantly worse than the 60 and 70 KIAS
speeds. Anyway, pretty bad numbers, and not very consistent either.
Maybe there was overall subsidence that day. Should have taken temp
readings and saved all that day's weather data.

The plots from my three sources compared to a published excel plot for
a clean Standard Cirrus showed fairly wild inconsistency between
sources mainly due to the Garmin's data. It also shows as mentioned
bad results at 40 and 50 KIAS, slowly getting better and 60 and 70.

Taking notes for next try which I won't get to for at least three
weeks. ... Aaron
  #7  
Old August 11th 11, 04:21 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Tony[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,965
Default Low test numbers on Standard Cirrus, what could it be?

On Aug 11, 10:07*am, akiley wrote:
On Aug 11, 1:31*am, (Alan) wrote:



In article writes:
Hi All,


I'm fairly new to soaring, but thought it might be fun to test our clubs St=
andard Cirrus to see if it was getting advertised L/D. *I jumped in with no=
t enough understanding of all the factors that effect performance, other th=
an reading how Dick Johnson does his tests.


I took a tow to 6000 agl on a calm early morning when ground temps were abo=
ut 70f. *I raised the gear, closed both vents and flew one minute legs afte=
r I stabilized the IAS at 40, 50, 60 and 70 KIAS. *Then I turned in the opp=
osite direction and flew the series again. *I video taped the gauges and go=
t an IGC file from SeeYou/iPaq.


I did NOT factor temps and didn't compute calibrated airspeed. My average o=
f both directions at each speed gave me: 26 L/D at 40 KIAS, 26.5 at 50, 28 =
at 60, and 25 at 70. *These numbers seem to be very low for a Standard Cirr=
us. *Johnson's results were in the neighborhood of 35 L/D. *It had no bugs,=
wing root tape, and yes, the gear was up.


Any comments or ideas other than sending me back to school? *... Aaron


* Well, doing it in both directions probably didn't have much effect, since
you were doing it with airspeed, not groundspeed.


* The suggestion that you do it for a greater time, such as 500 feet of
altitude, seems good. *Since you don't have an engine vibrating the altimeter,
you need to tap it to ensure it isn't lagging behind from minor friction.

  #8  
Old August 11th 11, 07:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
akiley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Low test numbers on Standard Cirrus, what could it be?

On Aug 11, 10:53*am, aerodyne wrote:
If you want another set of data, take a look at this video I made of
the Open Cirrus. *All the instruments were calibrated, you can see the
30 sec digital averager on the panel top, the timer on the lower left
with the altimeter will give you a timed measurement, and the Winter
on the left is a 2 min averager. *This flight is on OLC if you want
the GPS data.

I don't have time to comment on you results, except to say reread the
Johnson and Bikel articles on test measurement.

*http://www.youtube.com/user/aerodyne.../2/GJLeuUYbWdM

aerodyne


Thanks, interesting video. I just uploaded my video in two parts.
I'm pretty sure I collected the data correctly. Here is part 1.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgzhZDN_9RY

Here is part 2.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ic4DNgox7MA

I find the Excel spreadsheets hard to understand. There is one called
Performance.xls that is a blank. More homework I guess.

.... Aaron
  #9  
Old August 12th 11, 02:14 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
akiley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Low test numbers on Standard Cirrus, what could it be?

If anyone's interested in attempting to figure out, or give feedback
on my glide video, I'd be interested in comments. As I mentioned, the
numbers were not good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgzhZDN_9RY

Here is part 2.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ic4DNgox7MA


.... Aaron
  #10  
Old August 12th 11, 03:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Mike the Strike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 952
Default Low test numbers on Standard Cirrus, what could it be?

On Aug 12, 6:14*am, akiley wrote:
If anyone's interested in attempting to figure out, or give feedback
on my glide video, I'd be interested in comments. *As I mentioned, the
numbers were not good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgzhZDN_9RY

Here is part 2.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ic4DNgox7MA

... Aaron


Errors in your ASI could account for a good chunk of your problems.
Have you tried a calibration with another known source? With the
knowledge of air density, you can calculate true airspeed and
indicated airspeed from your GPS data.

As others have also mentioned, you don't need much vertical air
movement to screw things up either.


Mike
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Standard Cirrus Walt Connelly Soaring 23 March 20th 11 03:14 AM
Standard Cirrus C-Hook Randy[_2_] Soaring 26 September 26th 08 10:24 PM
Standard Cirrus Group Jim Hendrix Soaring 0 May 21st 08 03:15 PM
Standard Cirrus Don Burns Soaring 0 January 10th 07 05:24 AM
F/S - Standard Cirrus 75 Bob Soaring 0 October 4th 04 12:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.