MessagePlenty of things to do like using halogen bulbs, LED marker lights, LED 
flasher or even just going to a higher rated gen and regulator, but the best 
thing is to if you're going to put all the bells and whistles on is to opt for 
an alternator.  I don't know what it does for weight but it'll sure take care 
of all those unnecessary power needs.

Al DeMarzo
Visit the Ercoupe Swap Page 
Free, Easy and No Membership Required
http://www.ercoupeowners.com/swap/swapbook.htm


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: David Winters 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; 'Dan Hall' 
  Cc: 'ercoupe tech' ; 'AJ DeMarzo' 
  Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 7:45 PM
  Subject: RE: [ercoupe-tech] Landing Lights


  If you are using a generator, do not run both lights at a time on the ground. 
 Tends to drain the battery at idle, at least in my bird.

  Dave W
    -----Original Message-----
    From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
    Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 6:22 PM
    To: Dan Hall
    Cc: ercoupe tech; AJ DeMarzo
    Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Landing Lights


    Sort of on the same subject.....what king of gernerator or alternator setup 
is recommended for running those lights for an extended period of time?

    Fred
    ---- Dan Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 

    =============
    Al & Ed,
    True enough however; even with the landing lights and an O-200 I've 
averaged 4 GPH flying non-stop from O69 to AJO or about 356 NM. 

    My Coupe has also averaged about 4.3 GPH on a flight from CA across the 
Sierra's & Rockies to OSH in 2003, which was a slightly lower fuel burn than 
the Alon that flew out with me. 

    Also won a real squeaker in the last Copper State Dash Air Race, while 
running against a number of other airplanes including two Alons (come to think 
of it, the Coupe had no landing lights at that time - oops).

    I'm guessing that maybe my Coupe could do 5-8% better with no landing 
lights??? However I still don't want to cut up the flush riveted, flush access 
paneled, & custom painted wings; just to move the lights. 

    I like having the landing lights for a couple of reasons;
    1) I really like being able to see where I'm landing & taxing at night 
(100+ hours @ night). 
    2) Visibility is a big plus for mid-air collision avoidance when flying 
around SoCal, & Corona (AJO) for fuel. 
    3) The air traffic controller see those lights coming from a long ways out, 
and often assume I'm flying something bigger (those that don't know Ercoupes).

    If I was out of the LA basin and only doing day VFR, it'd probably be a 
different story however; overall, I'd have to say that it's well worth the 
extra 5 or 8 MPH to me. 

    Like Dan C., I always plan for Mach .13 @ an average of 4.8 GPH and usually 
do better (4.5 GPH +/-) anyway...... ;-)

    Dan H
    N3968H
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: AJ DeMarzo 
    Cc: ercoupe tech 
    Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 2:59 PM
    Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Landing Lights

    Ah, excellent point. Now that gas is up to $ 2muchagallon, remember less 
drag = more speed = better economy. In the example Syd gave, his aircraft was 
much more economical than Tandy's. If he didn't have the weight he would have 
been idling along at 4 gph! Keep it clean and smooth and light as possible.

    Al DeMarzo
    Visit the Ercoupe Swap Page 
    Free, Easy and No Membership Required
    http://www.ercoupeowners.com/swap/swapbook.htm

    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Syd Cohen 
    Cc: ercoupe tech 
    Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 4:50 PM
    Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Landing Lights

    Well, yes, Dan, speed is one issue, but fuel economy is another. Tandy 
Allen and I flew from Cape Girardeau MO to Sun N Fun two weeks ago. I was 10% 
faster, even though I was carrying a passenger and luggage for both of us, and 
Tandy was alone. At the end of each leg Tandy and I would top off our tanks and 
we'd put in the same amount of fuel. If I'd throttled back a bit I would have 
burned less fuel for the same distance with the same speed as Tandy. Drag does 
lots of bad things for airplanes.

    Syd

    Dan Caliendo wrote:

    You guys are too hung up on speed. I checked and it doesn't make any 
difference if my Ercoupe has 

    landing lights or not...... either way I get 0.13 mach!
    Dan C

    On Apr 23, 2008, at 8:32 AM, David Winters wrote:

    Syd,

    Dang! My coupe is really slow. Now, I may know one reason. It has a landing 
light on each main gear.

    It sounds to me like we need an LED nose-bowl light, to avoid drag but 
endure vibration and reduce wattage required.
    I suppose that is unlikely to happen, though, unless it could be designed 
to fit more than just the Ercoupe. But, surely that could be done.

    Any of you manufacturers or distributors out there listening?

    Dave Winters

    -----Original Message-----
    From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
Syd Cohen
    Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 6:25 AM
    Cc: [email protected]
    Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Landing Lights

    No drag penalty if the light is in the nosebowl, but I've been told that 
the bulbs don't last long due to engine vibration.

    Syd

    heavensounds wrote:

    OK... What about the nose bowl option?
    Eliacim

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Dan Hall
    To: Syd Cohen ; heavensounds
    Cc: [email protected]
    Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 11:00 PM
    Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Landing Lights

    Cut into the beautifully flush riveted and custom painted aluminum wings of 
my Ercoupe???
    That's NOT going to happen gentlemen !!!! :-)

    If I really needed that extra 8 MPH I'd be flying an RV. 

    Dan Hall
    N3968H
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: heavensounds
    To: Syd Cohen
    Cc: [email protected]
    Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 8:17 PM
    Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Landing Lights

    Skyport has a kit to install them in the wings. If I was installing landing 
lights I would go that way.
    Eliacim

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Syd Cohen
    Cc: [email protected]
    Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 9:45 PM
    Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Landing Lights

    Yes, Dan, I am confident. I've done quite a bit of drag testing on Ercoupes.

    Syd

    Dan Hall wrote:

    Hi Syd,
    Are you confident that number - 8 MPH for two landing lights? 

    The reason I ask is that I put two landing lights on the main gear fairings 
of my Ercoupe (no shades) about 5 years ago and it didn't seem to make that big 
of a difference however; I didn't take before and after measurements. 

    I fly at night and also appreciate the visibility while flying here in very 
busy SoCal.

    Dan Hall
    N3968H 
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Syd Cohen
    Cc: [email protected]
    Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 7:07 PM
    Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Landing Lights

    Just a caution, Ed. Each landing light assembly will cost you about 4 mph. 
Are you sure you want to do this?

    Syd

    Ed Granato wrote: 
    I found two old farings with landing lights in them but I think they 
    are too far gone to salvage. My existing farings are in great shape so 
    one idea was to obtain a pair of cylindrical sections that house the 
    lights and connect them to the farings already on the main gear. Does
    anyone have a pair of these or perhaps the entire faring-light combo in 
    good shape that they would consider selling?

    ----------------------------------------------------------
    No virus found in this incoming message.
    Checked by AVG. 
    Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.3/1392 - Release Date: 4/22/2008 
3:51 PM

    ----------------------------------------------------------
    No virus found in this incoming message.
    Checked by AVG. 
    Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.3/1392 - Release Date: 4/22/2008 
3:51 PM

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

    No virus found in this incoming message.
    Checked by AVG. 
    Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1394 - Release Date: 4/23/2008 
7:16 PM



     

Reply via email to