quote:

ORIGINAL: Lownverted

quote:

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

How much HP does it take to go from 155 mph to 170..? [with a 8x7]
It's a significant amount [almost 1 HP] and it isn't being furnished by the engine. The engine only has enough power to do 155 on it's own in calm air.
There are no free lunches in energy exchange and the engine acts like a watt meter in this case as it registers the energy boost with a measurable jump in rpm. It takes 2.6 HP to do 155 mph with a 8x7 and it takes 3.5 HP to go 170.
The external power is sent through the airframe, through the prop and the engine looks like ''The Hero'' because it was able to spool up in response to this invisible boost...but never forget the fact that the engine ON IT's OWN POWER never could have reached that level of power without outside help.
Works just the same way as in a vertical dive. People who know better can see power getting back fed into the machine from Mother Nature's stored energy.

Wrong, wrong wrong.

The difference in the GROUND speed is the wind. Not extra magic force. The plane is going the same AIRSPEED both ways.

Seroiusly, get a clue. There is no magic gain in HP.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lownverted

quote:

ORIGINAL: iron eagel

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lownverted



I isolated part of your quote above.

Actually Doppler is a pretty good measurement system, because it uses a time reference as it basis for calculations.

This is exactly why its not accurate!

Actually it is very accurate as the time reference is within parts per million ( the error is due to the algorithms used within the program) , Keep in mind that the indicated airspeed in the aircraft can also have a tolerance error of upwards of 5 % as well. The indicated airspeed in two aircraft flying side by side can be off from each other upwards of 10 percent if the tolerance errors for their airspeed indicators are both off by equal amounts positive and negative so as you can see the airspeed indicator isn't gospel either.
Now as far as how you can use the ground based speed readings to determine airspeed is simply factor in the wind plus or minus depending on your direction of travel. If the wind isn't parallel to your direction of travel vector analysis can compensate for the angular momentum.
Either way for our purposes close is good enough, we are not trying to rendezvous two spacecraft in orbit, and need only an indication of speed to get an idea of performance. Bottom line: your airspeed is not a good indication of your actual speed, Like I pointed out in my flight to Maine in a cub. It took me right around eight hours to make the 250 mile trip in the cub with gas, food and rest stops included, I have driven the the same trip in a little as 5 hours by car even dealing with the traffic in Boston, Portland and Augusta so this day I could have gotten there quicker driving.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Lownverted)

quote:

ORIGINAL: airraptor

Inverted i dont know who you are but just give up on PIG he doesnt get it. He thinks the plane is flying faster down wind than it is upwind. Now from the ground the plane does pass him faster downwind but the plane isnt flying faster.

He did give up on trying to explain how and engine can gain power and RPM flying down wind and lose power upwind. I do know one ting everytime i set the needle on the engine just before takeoff i will turn the plane down wind to get the needle set right LOL I wonder if if when i have an engine on the test stand will gain more RPM also pointed down wind. HUM....

Pig thanks for all the posts in here. really made me laugh.

quote:

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lownverted

quote:

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

How much HP does it take to go from 155 mph to 170..? [with a 8x7]
It's a significant amount [almost 1 HP] and it isn't being furnished by the engine. The engine only has enough power to do 155 on it's own in calm air.
There are no free lunches in energy exchange and the engine acts like a watt meter in this case as it registers the energy boost with a measurable jump in rpm. It takes 2.6 HP to do 155 mph with a 8x7 and it takes 3.5 HP to go 170.
The external power is sent through the airframe, through the prop and the engine looks like ''The Hero'' because it was able to spool up in response to this invisible boost...but never forget the fact that the engine ON IT's OWN POWER never could have reached that level of power without outside help.
Works just the same way as in a vertical dive. People who know better can see power getting back fed into the machine from Mother Nature's stored energy.

Wrong, wrong wrong.

The difference in the GROUND speed is the wind. Not extra magic force. The plane is going the same AIRSPEED both ways.

Seroiusly, get a clue. There is no magic gain in HP.

Mount a rubberband motor with a huge prop to the top of one of your planes and fly it both real slow and real fast to witness the transfer of energy both into and out of that motor with your own eyes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

quote:

ORIGINAL: airraptor

Inverted i dont know who you are but just give up on PIG he doesnt get it. He thinks the plane is flying faster down wind than it is upwind. Now from the ground the plane does pass him faster downwind but the plane isnt flying faster.

He did give up on trying to explain how and engine can gain power and RPM flying down wind and lose power upwind. I do know one ting everytime i set the needle on the engine just before takeoff i will turn the plane down wind to get the needle set right LOL I wonder if if when i have an engine on the test stand will gain more RPM also pointed down wind. HUM....

Pig thanks for all the posts in here. really made me laugh.

Your lying sack of BS speed claims never fail to make me laugh.
If I was caught blabbing such a blatant lie about my plane's speed in a public speed forum, I'd probably have to either change screen names or else get back into hot rodding where lying about your power and speed is considered status quo with all the yayhoo-wannabee-tirekickers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: airraptor

quote:

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

quote:

ORIGINAL: airraptor

Inverted i dont know who you are but just give up on PIG he doesnt get it. He thinks the plane is flying faster down wind than it is upwind. Now from the ground the plane does pass him faster downwind but the plane isnt flying faster.

He did give up on trying to explain how and engine can gain power and RPM flying down wind and lose power upwind. I do know one ting everytime i set the needle on the engine just before takeoff i will turn the plane down wind to get the needle set right LOL I wonder if if when i have an engine on the test stand will gain more RPM also pointed down wind. HUM....

Pig thanks for all the posts in here. really made me laugh.

Your lying sack of BS speed claims never fail to make me laugh.
If I was caught blabbing such a blatant lie about my plane's speed in a public speed forum, I'd probably have to either change screen names or else get back into hot rodding where lying about your power and speed is considered status quo with all the yayhoo-wannabee-tirekickers.

PIG where did i once in this thread state a Speed claim? Now your calling me a lyer? (Ok I went back and looked I said the LR-1 is around 170mph)

quote:

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

What do any of your sources say about doppler recordings that consistently show higher rpm downwind than upwind. ?
How does Wavoscope create rpm that isn't really there on the downwind leg..?
Just ignore it as ''magic''..?

You still haven't addressed this......Mount a rubberband motor with a huge prop to the top of one of your electric or fuel powered planes and fly it both real slow and real fast to witness the transfer of energy both into and out of that rubberband motor with your own eyes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: airraptor
CP i have had ''real'' telemetry in a plane. I was able to measure head temp, rpm and airspeed of the plane. none of those three area's data changed up wind or down wind as long as i stay fairly level. now the rpm and speed would rise in a dive both upwind and down wind. I did this on a WM t-34 with a OS 46 AX trying to find the best prop. the 46AX would turn the prop at 13,800 on the ground and run right around 15,100 in level flight. The air speed stayed right around 95 through the whole flight when level. i then switched to a engine that spin the same prop at 17,000 on the ground. It would unload to around 18,000-18,200. the flight sped only went up to 115-117. Still thru all this testing never once did the engine gainpower/rpm downwind.

quote:

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

quote:

ORIGINAL: airraptor
CP i have had ''real'' telemetry in a plane. I was able to measure head temp, rpm and airspeed of the plane. none of those three area's data changed up wind or down wind as long as i stay fairly level. now the rpm and speed would rise in a dive both upwind and down wind. I did this on a WM t-34 with a OS 46 AX trying to find the best prop. the 46AX would turn the prop at 13,800 on the ground and run right around 15,100 in level flight. The air speed stayed right around 95 through the whole flight when level. i then switched to a engine that spin the same prop at 17,000 on the ground. It would unload to around 18,000-18,200. the flight sped only went up to 115-117. Still thru all this testing never once did the engine gainpower/rpm downwind.

Haven't you flown in a pylon race or just for fun where the plane doesn't unload until it makes the first downwind turn...? No dive involved.

quote:

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

quote:

ORIGINAL: airraptor
CP i have had ''real'' telemetry in a plane. I was able to measure head temp, rpm and airspeed of the plane. none of those three area's data changed up wind or down wind as long as i stay fairly level. now the rpm and speed would rise in a dive both upwind and down wind. I did this on a WM t-34 with a OS 46 AX trying to find the best prop. the 46AX would turn the prop at 13,800 on the ground and run right around 15,100 in level flight. The air speed stayed right around 95 through the whole flight when level. i then switched to a engine that spin the same prop at 17,000 on the ground. It would unload to around 18,000-18,200. the flight sped only went up to 115-117. Still thru all this testing never once did the engine gainpower/rpm downwind.

Haven't you flown in a pylon race or just for fun where the plane doesn't unload until it makes the first downwind turn...? No dive involved.

quote:

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

quote:

ORIGINAL: airraptor
CP i have had ''real'' telemetry in a plane. I was able to measure head temp, rpm and airspeed of the plane. none of those three area's data changed up wind or down wind as long as i stay fairly level. now the rpm and speed would rise in a dive both upwind and down wind. I did this on a WM t-34 with a OS 46 AX trying to find the best prop. the 46AX would turn the prop at 13,800 on the ground and run right around 15,100 in level flight. The air speed stayed right around 95 through the whole flight when level. i then switched to a engine that spin the same prop at 17,000 on the ground. It would unload to around 18,000-18,200. the flight sped only went up to 115-117. Still thru all this testing never once did the engine gainpower/rpm downwind.

Haven't you flown in a pylon race or just for fun where the plane doesn't unload until it makes the first downwind turn...? No dive involved.

quote:

ORIGINAL: speedracerntrixie

Ok now that I am able to read this and not laugh. As the airplane gains speed, the prop becomes more efficient and unloads thus bringing the engine into the power band. This is going to happen if the airplane is turned or not. In fact it may happen sooner going strait as a turn is drag. Problem is I am not capable of flying a 150 + MPH airplane 250 yards away. Are you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

quote:

ORIGINAL: speedracerntrixie

Ok now that I am able to read this and not laugh. As the airplane gains speed, the prop becomes more efficient and unloads thus bringing the engine into the power band. This is going to happen if the airplane is turned or not. In fact it may happen sooner going strait as a turn is drag. Problem is I am not capable of flying a 150 + MPH airplane 250 yards away. Are you?

The planes in question that would wait for the first turn before hitting the pipe always did so right after the turn was complete...regardless of when I decided to turn.

Why would Wavoscope consistently read the upwind frequency [rpm] low..? My recorder is always pointed in the same direction regardless of wind. Both directions of the pass are close to the same distance from the recorder. If the discrepency is small [like a few hundred rpm] I wouldn't try to explain it. In the case of the 2 passes I showed earlier the discrepency is too large to ignore.

quote:

ORIGINAL: iron eagel

If the plane was going away from you an the microphone while going upwind you would be getting a Doppler shift that is lowering the frequency that you hear. That may possibly explain it, this is just a guess on my part...

from the Wave0Scope manual;
The Doppler effect is caused by the finite speed of sound in the air. If an acoustic source moves trough the air, then in front of it the acoustic waves are compressed, which leads to a higher sound - behind the acoustic source the
waves are stretched, what results in a lower sound frequency

quote:

ORIGINAL: airraptor

The turn is adding ''G's'' the plane and fuel systems so maybe that strain on the fuel draw leaned the engine just enough so that it got on the pipe as you turned. I bet it would do the same taking off down wind and you turn upwind or even pulled up in a climb.

quote:

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

I just got done reading from a couple of those ''quick fact'' websites that high pitched sound is prone to being altered with air movement. So the amount of shift might not be effected as much but the frequency can be.

quote:

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

quote:

ORIGINAL: speedracerntrixie

Ok now that I am able to read this and not laugh. As the airplane gains speed, the prop becomes more efficient and unloads thus bringing the engine into the power band. This is going to happen if the airplane is turned or not. In fact it may happen sooner going strait as a turn is drag. Problem is I am not capable of flying a 150 + MPH airplane 250 yards away. Are you?

The planes in question that would wait for the first turn before hitting the pipe always did so right after the turn was complete...regardless of when I decided to turn.

Why would Wavoscope consistently read the upwind frequency [rpm] low..? My recorder is always pointed in the same direction regardless of wind. Both directions of the pass are close to the same distance from the recorder. If the discrepency is small [like a few hundred rpm] I wouldn't try to explain it. In the case of the 2 passes I showed earlier the discrepency is too large to ignore.