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 » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Standards for H.P. corr. factors ??



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #15  
Old July 7th 07, 09:39 PM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
Peter Dohm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,754
Default Standards for H.P. corr. factors ??

wrote in message
oups.com...

I get a kick out of the 100 HP VW's, especially.
--
Jim in NC

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

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

Even 80hp should have you rolling on the floor :-)

After waving the magical 80hp flag at a tent-full of round-eyed
admirers the next kerchief out of his sleeve is usually "3.3 gph"
followed by a round of patting himself on the back in routine worth of
a French circus. Are we great or what?

Truth is, if you know engines and want some serious fun, get a bunch
of real engine guys together and show them the Aero-vee assembly
video. I swear to God it's the funniest thing I've seen in years.
Seriously. Most guys assume it's a put-on. When they realize it's
being sold as a 'expert advice' their reactions range from blowing
beer out their nose to simply sitting there in stunned amazement.

-R.S.Hoover

I am much more of a theoretical engine guy than a real engine guy, and IIRC
it took a little effort on your part to set me straight on the thermal
limits of the VW heads; so I have faith that you will help to clear up
whatever misconceptions I may have on this as well.

With that disclaimer...

it seems to me that there is an additional way to look at the 80HP VW issue:
80HP from 130CID at 3450RPM is plausible in standard air; for a time limited
by cooling, etc. However, my limited knowledge of propellers suggests that
either the RPM or the manifold pressure must change quite soon--even with an
engine that could handle the load continuously--and I am not convinced that
it is achievable more than momentarily

Soooo.... the 3.3GPH may be the real key to the puzzle. Given a fixed
pitch prop, there is no way for this all to happen at the most efficient RPM
and MP. Therefore, 3.3GPH means to me that cruise is less than 43HP; since
about 13 horsepower hours per gallon is the best it can get under the
circumstances and with the type of engine and fuel system in use.

And then... dividing 43 by 0.75 it becomes clear that, when the subsequent
round table discussion is included, this is at least a 3-Beer video.

Peter
(Also starting to wonder about that little jewel from down under... )


 




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
Human factors RECKLESSNESS private Aerobatics 60 May 10th 05 05:52 AM
Human factors RECKLESSNESS private Piloting 68 May 10th 05 05:52 AM
Human factors RECKLESSNESS private Soaring 72 May 10th 05 05:52 AM
Strike Fighter Squadron OPTEMPO factors [email protected] Naval Aviation 4 March 3rd 05 12:14 PM
JAR 22 STANDARDS Gordon Schubert Soaring 2 April 7th 04 05:31 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.