Mike Willis (in, I think, Ireland) wrote:

> Unfortunately I get 25 litres per hour from my Alon 

> with a C90.  It drops a bit on longer trips, but most 

> of my flying is less than one hour so includes a climb.  

> 25 litres per hour is 6.6 US gallons per hour.  Sure 

> I could fly slower and burn less, but to me the 

> cruise at 85 kts is as slow as I want to travel.

 

???????????????????

 

6.6 gph at 97 mph? (85kts.)  What's wrong, there?

 

With my C-85 and a very flat climb prop, I habitually got 5.4 gph at 100 mph
(accurately measured) at 2400 rpm.

 

Most Ercoupes get distinctly better speeds with the C-85 engine and a 7148
or 7150 prop frequently yielding 104 mph (90.4 kt.) and 108 mph (94 kt.)
respectively at 2400 rpm.  Forney Aircoupes tend to get a bit higher speed
with the C-90 engine and Alon Aircoupes get 5-15 mph greater speed due to
the better aerodynamics around the canopy.

 

If I didn't know better, I'd say it sounds like you have one of these
conditions:

 

1.      An over-pitched prop, set too steep, intended for cruise and the
engine just can't spin it properly at that power and gross weight.

 

2.      An over-weight plane that's so heavy, the engine just can't get it
up to the normal airspeeds a Coupe should attain with a C-90.  This could
lead to flying at a very high throttle setting (even though it might only
show a lower rpm number due to a too-steep prop and a very high fuel burn.
(Note that 1 and 2 can be heavily interrelated though can also occur
separately.)

 

3.      Engine problems giving low power output at high fuel burn.

 

4.      The airframe is mis-rigged or has alignment problems and has low
efficiency due to flying crooked or control surfaces not being correctly
aligned. [You did mention needing some right rudder in cruise?]

 

I went looking back through your old messages and saw that you have a 7150
pitch prop.  That means you are getting appropriate airspeeds for your prop
and 2200 rpm.  You mentioned that the previous owner's meticulous records
indicated 18 lph (4.75gph) @ 2200rpm and that sounds about right to me.  So,
your results are not what I'd expect.

 

Do you usually fill up at your field's pump?  Did the previous owner base
the plane at the same field?  Have you cross-tested the pump's accuracy?

 

Here are numbers from Paul Prentice's airplane efficiency chart he allowed
me to post on my website:

http://edburkhead.com/Ercoupe/enginepropeller_efficiency.htm 

 

ENGINE  PROP  COUPE    AVG     CRUISE  TIAS    TAS   MAX   IAS     TAS
 TYPE   SIZE  MODEL EFFICIENCY  RPM   SEA LVL 5000'  RPM  SEA LVL 5000'
  
C-75    7351   C-D      97      2275   106     114   2275  106     114
  
C-85    7150  CD-to-G   95      2400   108     116   2575  116     125
  
C-90    7152  F1-F1A    95      2350   110     118   2475  116     125
  
C-90    7153  A2-A2A    97      2350   114     123   2475  120     129
  
O-200   6950   D-G      91      2500   108     116   2750  118     127

 

You're already cruising at a conservative airspeed (97 mph) @ 2200 rpm.  

 

For those who cruise fast and are suffering from high fuel costs, here are
some observations:

I can see high speed cruise for going places, when you've a need to get
there.  But, when the purpose is to be in the air and going places is just
the excuse, then slowing down greatly cuts your costs per flying hour.  Your
miles per gallon and minutes per gallon go way up at slower airspeeds.

 

Paraphrasing "Stick and Rudder," the speed we call "cruise" in airplanes
isn't really a good cruising airspeed, it's a speed that gets us there fast
without it being too horrendously expensive.

 

The cruising speed would be just a bit above best glide speed.

 

When flying high with the engine leaned, you are flying in the low indicated
airspeed regime with the engine throttled way back by the thin air of
altitude and the leaning.  This is the best angle of attack for maximum
efficiency and range.  But, due to the thin air, your true speed is quite a
bit faster than the indicated airspeed that the plane "feels" so you're
getting your high efficiency mushing flight at a fairly fast true airspeed.

 

Me, I'm building (way too slowly) a plane that can soar, engine off, in
strong thermals.  If really ridiculous fuel costs make it necessary, I might
have to fly it mostly in the middle of the day, soaring in the thermals with
the birds and just using the engine to get up.

 

For your plane, something "does not compute."

 

(P.S.  Your messages are coming through at 6 pt. type and are hard to read.
Is there anything you can do on the sending end to increase the font size?)

 

Ed

 

Ed Burkhead

http://edburkhead.com/Ercoupe/index.htm            East Peoria, Illinois

ed -at- edburk???head.??com                      (remove the ? marks and
change -at- to @)

 

Reply via email to