Papa Lima pickup

[kwmoore]

Nearly ten months of waiting were rewarded last Thursday when I airlined out to EQA to take delivery of my Katmai. The forecast predicted beautiful flying weather over the lower midwest and west for a week or more and it really seemed like the stars were aligned.

Todd picked me up at ICT after taking care of some paperwork at the local FAA office and we arrived at PPP about 4:30. 812PL gleamed in the hangar (new photos here (http://www.260sepilots.org/gallery/812PL?&page=4)).

After a walk around and laying on of hands, Todd suggested with a twinkle in his eye, "Would you like to take her flying?" Well shoot, twist my arm. I climbed aboard, started up and turned on the avionics. After a few touch and goes that revealed some rust requiring removal, I headed over to Newton (EWK) for some reportedly inexpensive fuel ($3.80, but then they tacked on some sales tax that brought the total to $4.10). On the way back I climbed to 6500, entered some waypoints for a roundabout return to EQA, and let the STEC30/GPSS do the flying. The same setup in my earlier 260se tended to overshoot sharp turns at cruise speed, then fishtail trying to capture the desired track, but not this one. It nailed a 110 degree right turn and several others, rolling right out on course. Nice. I also noted that this was indeed at least 4-5 kt faster than my earlier planes, showing 153-154 KTAS at 6500, 75% best power ROP. The GAMijectors were not quite optimized yet and we decided that I would drop by GAMi on Monday to finish the job--more on that later. I arrived back at PPP just after sunset; we hangared the planes and called it a night.

Friday I headed over to Bevan for a quick overview of the panel's capabilities, 430w database updates, and to activate the 496 XM weather subscription. Tad spent the morning with me and was very helpful. After that came a little more practice, during which it became clear that some dual with Todd would be quite helpful to regain my slow/short field landing skills. A large part of Friday and Saturday was spent studying manuals and organizing stuff for the return trip. In the evening we picked up Jo at ICT; she and a friend were returning from a long-planned vacation in England.

Sunday morning I went up for some refresher dual with Todd, including slow flight, stalls, steep turns as slow as 45 kt, trimmed out :eek:, and slow/short field landing practice. With Todd's help I was soon landing with over-the-fence speeds of 40-45 kt, carrying some power to cushion the sink and flare. Even so, entering the flare at 45 kt still leaves room for some noticeable float before touchdown :cool:. What a remarkable plane! The extra 4-5 kt low end margin conferred by the extended wing was evident. I practiced a bit more solo later in the afternoon. I'm certainly not ready for Dewey Moore or Mile Hi, but I'll get a kick out of pondering which quarter of Palo Alto's 2400 foot runway I want to use :D. Todd then changed the oil and tended to a few items--a strobe and intermittent anti-collision light--and the plane was ready to go for Monday.

I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Jo's extraordinary efforts on Sunday. Jet-lagged and clearly very tired, she nonetheless spent more than ten hours getting all the plane's paperwork in order so I could depart first thing Monday. I felt a bit embarrassed, but it's just another example of PPP's going the extra mile (or 2 or 3) for a customer. Many, many thanks to Jo.

We had a pleasant and unexpected surprise on Sunday: Louise Scudieri ("Squeege" on this forum) stopped by in her 230se/stol 1941M (photos here (http://www.260sepilots.org/gallery/Oct-28-Fly-In-Out)). It was great to finally meet her and put a face to her many posts, what a delightful person. She even treated us to a nicely executed soft-field takeoff on departure from rwy 15.

Stay tuned for further installments...

[joejenie]

Congradulations Kevin! Looks like a beautiful bird. I'm definitely jealous.;) Did you happen to fly out with Todd to Dodge City and see my bird?

[kwmoore]

Congratulations Kevin! Looks like a beautiful bird. I'm definitely jealous. ;) Did you happen to fly out with Todd to Dodge City and see my bird?
We did not go to Dodge City while I was there but Todd remarked that things were proceeding rapidly there on your plane.

[kwmoore]

Monday morning bright and early--well, at least early, about sunrise--I departed on the return trip home. The first stop was Ada, OK (KADH) for a final GAMijector tune up at GAMi (http://www.gami.com/). This is an iterative, empirical process for each individual engine, sometimes requiring as many as 4 cycles of testing and injector adjustments or swaps. Todd had made progress through two swaps but the GAMi spread was still 0.4-0.6 gph and the engine ran noticeably rough LOP. He and I agreed it would be more efficient to finish the job at GAMi since it was on my way.

My preflight briefing seemed to imply that every single taxiway and runway exit was closed for construction. A phone call to the airport office revealed that a single runway exit, A1 at the approach end of Rwy 35 was open. Whew. During our test flights we did all of our departures from Rwy 35 and landings on 17.

My host was John-Paul Townsend, a very pleasant and knowledgeable fellow. He's clearly a very bright guy with a physics background, I wonder if his business nickname/call sign is "The Pope?" ;) He looked over Todd's most recent data and had injectors 1, 5 & 6 pulled for adjustment. This and the reinstallation was completed just before lunch. During this time he gave me a tour of the GAMi and Tornado Alley Turbo (TAT) facilities. The two companies share facilities although they are separate business entities. I got to see the assembly area for the Cirrus TN-SR22 components as well as the test stand where they have developed all of their internal combustion physics data. I also got to meet George Braly (founder). I went to lunch with Tim Roehl and 8 or 10 of the staff, along with another customer who was on site for some upgrades to his TN-Bonanza. A very enjoyable meal during which I learned a lot about the company and its various projects.

After lunch we went for our first test flight, climbing straight out to 6500 and then performing two GAMi lean tests. These revealed that another round of adjustments was in order, although the improvement was evident. On the return I landed long on 17 just so I wouldn't have to log the rollout as cross-country time. I briefed John-Paul beforehand on the anticipated 45-50 kt over-the-fence speed for landing so he wouldn't be nervous! ;)

This time all six injectors were pulled and after about an hour of work were reinstalled for another flight. The final test flight showed a spread of 0.2 - 0.4 gph and we called it a day.

I brought back a useful tidbit of information, John-Paul said that on our normally aspirated engines it is more important to keep CHTs in line than to be a certain number of degrees LOP. The latter is more critical on TN engines that "think" they're at sea level all the time. Nonetheless I mostly conformed to the IO-470 LOP table that I posted earlier, see post #11 in this thread (http://www.260sepilots.org/forums/showthread.php?t=444).

The improvement was dramatic, at least to me. I think my FS450 shows 0.2-0.3 gph higher than actual fuel flow--not a bad place to be if it has to be off! Some performance numbers on the way home:

6500 feet, 59 deg F, altimeter 30.05, full throttle, 2500 rpm:
ROP: 137 KIAS, 153 KTAS, 16.8 gph (about 150 ROP)
LOP: 130 KIAS, 145 KTAS, 12.5 gph (30-35 LOP)

8500 feet, 51 deg F, 30.05, full throttle, 2500 rpm:
ROP: 131 KIAS, 151 KTAS, 15.4 gph (~125 ROP)
LOP: 125 KIAS, 144 KTAS, 12.2 gph (20-25 LOP)

For most of the trip home I ran LOP in cruise with wide open throttle, block-to-block fuel consumption was 10.5-11 gph and true airspeeds were 141-145. This efficiency is hard to beat and I am very pleased. :cool: On takeoff and climb I just leaned to keep EGTs at 1300 or below. Todd had the full power fuel flow set at 23.5 gph, now that I'm operating out of sea level I may nudge it up a bit to 24 or slightly more.

The folks at GAMi were fine hosts and I was very pleased with the results. I recommend you visit them if you get a chance, but call in advance, they're really busy! :)

[jjbely]

Hi Kevin,

This is looking good, I hope that I will end up with the same set of figures on mine, hoping for my delivery sometime in spring. Did you get any information on their Prism system ? After making so many of these TnSR22 they should have enough cash to finalize what has been a work in progress for years.

Cheers

JJ

[Alex Beylin]

Kevin,

looks great! Congratulations and thanks for a detailed pirep.

[kwmoore]

From ADH I flew to Sherman TX (KSWI) where I was met by my father, youngest brother and his family. They live in McKinney; it turns out McKinney airport was closing the next morning for 30 days for repaving the runway!

My youngest brother's wife is fearful of flying, especially in airliners. I always thought it was a "control" thing. Sure enough, she asked to go for a ride and my two nieces came along in the back seat. We levitated off rwy 16 and headed west at 4500 feet, then meandered a bit south and returned to SWI as it was beginning to get dark. I explained to her everything going on and she didn't seem fearful at all--interesting. The girls loved it; future pilots?

Next morning at sunrise my Dad and I launched westbound. The first couple of hours were really smooth and enjoyable. Turbulence began to make itself felt just before we landed at Tucumcari for (expensive: $4.50) fuel. With only a brief respite over Albuquerque we were pounded by turbulence for the next 4 hours. Altitude made no difference 12,500, 10,500, 8500, it was all rough. Oh, and there were 35-45 kt headwinds out of the southwest. My Dad was a real trooper. Over eastern AZ I'd finally had enough and we decided to land at Sedona and call it a day. Winds favored 21 but were from 160 at 15 gusting to 25. The flare & touchdown was interesting but I just stayed with it and kept flying until the wheels squeaked on, the 260se is really good at this sort of thing. A late lunch at the airport restaurant and we retired to a room at the Sky Ranch Lodge near the field for the remainder of the afternoon. My Dad was pooped and so was I.

The next morning we flew 2 hr to his home in Hemet (KHMT). Light headwinds (<12 kt) and minimal turbulence were the reward for our patience. I continued on to PAO and landed about 2:00 pm.

On these legs I got to use some of the avionics features. First, the weather on the 496 is fabulous! METARS for reporting airports, surface winds and winds aloft, and I'm sure lots of other stuff I would only have used if there were clouds and storms enroute. On the HMT --> PAO leg I monitored PAO METARS and watched it improve from IFR to MVFR (1000 ft broken with 4 miles vis). Rather than try to sneak beneath the clouds and go into PAO VFR I elected to do the GPS31 approach. I've flown this approach dozens of times with the GNS430, but I was reminded that these were GNS430w when a glideslope came alive at the FAF! Cool, I just followed the glideslope down to MDA and landed straight in. :cool:

The 496 seems to me an amazing value. It's less than 1/3 of the price of the MX20 I had in 812KT but does far more. The screen is bright enough and very crisp and detailed. The weather information is accessible and well organized. And after shutdown I can take it in the car to find the nearest Szechuan restaurant! ;) Finally, something in aviation that offers more value for less cost.

[Pete]

Not to hijack the thread, but Kevin's comment above (quoted below) reminded me of a humorous moment with a fairly young flight instructor several years ago during a BFR in N978PB.

This was at "I69", the location of Sporty's, who also run an extensive flight training program with advanced work in C-182s; so the CFII was experienced with current model C-182 flight characteristics.

Kevin wrote: "I briefed John-Paul beforehand on the anticipated 45-50 kt over-the-fence speed for landing so he wouldn't be nervous!"

During the oral discussion period of the BFR, I had mentioned to the CFII that the 260SE had a 38-40kt stall speed. But unlike Kevin, I wasn't more specific about speeds on short final, and didn't think to issue a reminder during the flight.

On final, as I slowed 978PB down through 55 - 50 - 48 - to 45, his body language became noticeably pronounced and fidgety, and he finally said "SPEED" in a high squeaky voice. I do think his testicles and voice box actually shook hands there for a moment.

As we touched down at about 40 kts, I reminded him of the virtues of the 260SE, its canard and the resulting slow stall speed, yet he remained oddly quiet until after we returned to the training office and I bought the poor guy a Coke.

[kwmoore]

I had experienced this before with my 260se's but it's even more pronounced with the Katmai...

After five days of crappy weather I was finally able to get out this afternoon for a short flight and some practice, just myself and about 64 gallons of fuel. For departure from PAO winds were 15G20 right down the runway, which sounded like fun. ;) I applied power and quickly scanned the instruments, only to find the ASI passing rapidly through 42 KIAS, and a slight wheelbarrow starting to develop. A quick rotation and we were off, it couldn't have taken more than 200 feet of runway.

As you can imagine, it was no problem making the first turnoff when I landed back at PAO...:D The tower asked if this were a new 182! :cool:

So far, using mostly LOP operation, block-to-block fuel consumption is consistently 10.5 - 11 gph. Gotta love this plane!

[kwmoore]

During the oral discussion period of the BFR, I had mentioned to the CFII that the 260SE had a 38-40kt stall speed. But unlike Kevin, I wasn't more specific about speeds on short final, and didn't think to issue a reminder during the flight.

On final, as I slowed 978PB down through 55 - 50 - 48 - to 45, his body language became noticeably pronounced and fidgety, and he finally said "SPEED" in a high squeaky voice. I do think his testicles and voice box actually shook hands there for a moment.

As we touched down at about 40 kts, I reminded him of the virtues of the 260SE, its canard and the resulting slow stall speed, yet he remained oddly quiet until after we returned to the training office and I bought the poor guy a Coke.
Yeah, I've made a point of briefing GA-savvy passengers and CFIs who are unfamiliar with the Peterson on the slow speeds. The time or two I've neglected to do it, final approaches at 45-55 kt have definitely raised eyebrows.

[kwmoore]

I left work a little early to take Senior Management and Byron for an evening flight over the the coast, up to Napa, and back home down the east side of the bay. The weather had been gorgeous all day and I just couldn't let it pass by without flying.

High clouds blazed yellow, then orange and finally red, both in the sky and by reflection in the Pacific as we cruised smoothly up the coast at 3500 feet. The lights of SF were just coming on when we passed over the Golden Gate on the way to Napa. The usual rush hour traffic crawl was underway, with Marin County's Rte 101 ablaze with southbound headlights and northboud tail lights.

This was Byron's first ride in our new plane and he was a very happy passenger, even dozed off for a while just before we entered the pattern at Napa.

I got to see how WOTLOP (wide open throttle, lean of peak) operation at low altitude faired in 812PL. I was pleased by how it turned out:

3500 feet, 67 deg F, altimeter 30.02
full throttle, 2500 rpm, leaned to 13.6-13.8 gph, about 35-40 deg LOP
All CHTs were 350 or lower, all EGTs were 1490 or lower
She turned in 134 KIAS, for about 143 KTAS

Operating out of sea level with a fast airframe and speed kit, I really think the IO-550 would be more operational trouble than it's worth (to me, at least). I'd be constantly managing my speed and fuel flow to stay in the green arc. The extra 5-700 fpm climb would be impressive but in >95% of my flying completely unnecessary. I'm happy to stay with the IO-470.

An interesting observation was that when I reduced power 3"-4" to descend, the plane gained speed in the descent into the low 140s (yellow arc). I had to reduce power another 2" and roll in some aft trim to get the desired 500 fpm descent, keeping airspeed just below the top of the green arc. Clean airframe! It will be interesting to find the right power setting to track an ILS glideslope. In other planes (Cirrus, stock C182) a power reduction of about 3" alone gave the desired descent rate with little or no trim change required.

[nworth]

It will be interesting to find the right power setting to track an ILS glideslope.
The routine I have been using is to go to 18 inches and 10 degrees near to intercepting the localizer. Then, once commencing down the GS, I've been using about 14.5 inches, full rich, prop full fine (and leave the 10 degrees flaps in) with no change of trim and this works well. Seems to give 90-100 kts ground speed (which the tower likes), lots of control but not so fast I can't get it slow at the end. Also, if coupled, the 55X wanders at less than about 80 kts indicated.

I will be interested to see what you are seeing for glide (both best glide IAS and glide ratio) given the extended wings. I'm not sure I am comfortable with the accuracy of my tests...

My still incomplete speed tests (after the rigging by John Effinger in Texas) are showing about 153kts best TAS. The plane flies way nicer but it appears, alas, that I only recovered the speed I had BEFORE I sent it off to the paint shop (who did a nice job of painting but, I am now convinced, not so nice a job of putting the parts and pieces back together again.)

So, it looks like 99X or your plane is the new speed champ....

At least my LOP numbers are about in line with yours....

[kwmoore]

The routine I have been using is to go to 18 inches and 10 degrees near to intercepting the localizer. Then, once commencing down the GS, I've been using about 14.5 inches, full rich, prop full fine (and leave the 10 degrees flaps in) with no change of trim and this works well. Seems to give 90-100 kts ground speed (which the tower likes), lots of control but not so fast I can't get it slow at the end. Also, if coupled, the 55X wanders at less than about 80 kts indicated.
Thanks, I'll give it a try in an IPC attempt this weekend. As you put it, this plane indeed seems to have helium in the wings, it just doesn't want to come down.

My still incomplete speed tests (after the rigging by John Effinger in Texas) are showing about 153kts best TAS. The plane flies way nicer but it appears, alas, that I only recovered the speed I had BEFORE I sent it off to the paint shop (who did a nice job of painting but, I am now convinced, not so nice a job of putting the parts and pieces back together again.)

So, it looks like 99X or your plane is the new speed champ....
Likely it's still 99X, at least until some King Katmais get in the hands of customers. Jo's N58565 is a contender as well.

[kwmoore]

The routine I have been using is to go to 18 inches and 10 degrees near to intercepting the localizer. Then, once commencing down the GS, I've been using about 14.5 inches, full rich, prop full fine (and leave the 10 degrees flaps in) with no change of trim and this works well. Seems to give 90-100 kts ground speed (which the tower likes), lots of control but not so fast I can't get it slow at the end.
Did an IPC and BFR today. A variation of what you recommended worked out. I flew the approaches with no flaps, and at 100 KIAS (~16" mp), a reduction of 4.5-5" mp worked very well. Thanks!

I will be interested to see what you are seeing for glide (both best glide IAS and glide ratio) given the extended wings. I'm not sure I am comfortable with the accuracy of my tests....
Part of the BFR exercise was a smulated engine out at ~5500 feet with a glide to the nearest airport and low approach (about 50-100 agl, enough to convince the CFI that we had the field made. At 70 KIAS, sink rate was about 700 + 50 fpm, one could almost just fly it into the ground with but a minor flare to cushion the touchdown, and likely no damage would result. It seems to me that best glide for the Katmai is somewhere between 65-70 kt.

[nworth]

It seems to me that best glide for the Katmai is somewhere between 65-70 kt.
70 kts is the number I have been using as well. Less if lighter.

Did you get a chance to determine the glide ratio at that speed? My experiments seem to put it between 11 and 12 but I haven't been able to nail it down. I've been using the glide ratio function on the Garmin 396 but it's too jumpy to really nail it down.

[kwmoore]

70 kts is the number I have been using as well. Less if lighter.

Did you get a chance to determine the glide ratio at that speed? My experiments seem to put it between 11 and 12 but I haven't been able to nail it down. I've been using the glide ratio function on the Garmin 396 but it's too jumpy to really nail it down.
At 700 fpm down one descends about a vertical statute mile in ~7.5 minutes. 70 kt is about 81 statute mph, ~1.33 miles per minute. This gives a glide ratio of ~10:1.

The GPS' glide ratio function is useful in real world flying but as it uses groundspeed (including headwind/tailwind components) it's difficult to determine the still air glide ratio.

[kwmoore]

I flew to Big Bear CA Monday for the plane's Teflon coating by Wing Waxers, which took most of the day Tuesday.

Monday morning I activated the XM Radio, with the XM weather service it's only an additional $7 per month, so why not? On the 2+ hr flight I played with it and enjoyed the various channels, excellent reception. I continue to learn more about the weather capabilities of this unit. Looking at the Winds Aloft page allowed me to select a more efficient altitude (9500 feet) than I might have used for the bulk of the flight down the central valley. I monitored L35 METARS every hour and noted that surface winds were increasing, to 15G22 by the time I arrived. Sure enough the pattern and approach were a bumpy affair into this mountain airport!

At about 3:45 Tuesday I departed Big Bear (L35) for the short hop downhill to Hemet (HMT). Field elevation is ~6700 feet, and density altitude was about 8200. Winds were about 10-12 kt down the runway. Takeoff was effortless, maybe 600 feet ground roll and a 900+ fpm climbout at 75-80 KIAS. The LA basin was very hazy with many airports' METARS reporting MVFR, even IFR conditions. Fortunately Hemet was VFR with 7-10 miles vis. Most of the flight back to PAO was at night and the 496 again helped with selecting an optimal altitude for winds and turbulence. The terrain page confirmed graphically and in real time that the relatively low altitude of flight indeed kept us clear of the granite, as planned, making my father a much happier camper. A nice touch for him was my selection of the "40s" XM channel, and he got to listen to many songs he remembered from young aldulthood 60+ years ago.

The 496 is really a remarkable value! :)

[nworth]

At 700 fpm down one descends about a vertical statute mile in ~7.5 minutes. 70 kt is about 81 statute mph, ~1.33 miles per minute. This gives a glide ratio of ~10:1.
I do not follow your methodology here.

Are you assuming that a 700 fpm descent is the descent rate for Vbg? How do you know this? (Best power off descent *time* is not equal to best *distance* glide descent rate usually).

Were you in still air or did you do a 4 quadrant test? Vbg is a still air number. As you know, in a headwind you must increase the IAS (and reduce in a tailwind) to obtain best distance (which, after all, is the whole point of this in an engine out situation). The descent rate would change as well depending on wind vector.

[witrakw]

out of all the toys that I added/upgraded lately, XM weather has clearly been the most useful, enroute flight reassuring and what I play with the most. The more inexperienced one is with weather flying, the more useful it is. For a novice like myself, trying to ferret out area forecasts, current metars, TAF's, can be a guessing game prior to launch. And even then, one worries about old data. I haven't found calling FSS all that helpful other than getting any TFR's that are obscurred; since TFR's are displayed rather obviously with XM data, notams are the one thing that might be important from FSS. But I honestly have never had a significant notam given to me that affected where I fly. Around the midwest, most notams seem to be given to you by ATC if they are of any import. Most of the weather info that FSS gives me seems to be a regurgitation of what is on ADDS. Calling FlightWatch enroute can be helpful, but sometimes geographically confusing and doesn't give you the big weather picture unless you have a pretty good mental picture of your intended route with all of the various weather reporting points. To get some experience with the different doppler color rain displays I have launched and headed for rain on the XM weather display. It appears to be true what articles say about the different color intensities. Light and medium green to light yellow are no problem and give MVFR visuals. Am just exploring 'light pink' in cold weather; so far it has not been snow, but like ice crystals suspended in the air without anything hitting the windshield or stuff flying by the wing...almost like cold light fog/decreased vis.
Anyway, putting in a GDL 69(no A, so i can't get tunes) and paying 30bucks/month has been $$ well spent. From what Kevin M says, maybe I should upgrade to the aviator "heavy" package to get winds and cloud info.

bill w

[kwmoore]

I do not follow your methodology here.

Are you assuming that a 700 fpm descent is the descent rate for Vbg? How do you know this? (Best power off descent *time* is not equal to best *distance* glide descent rate usually).

Were you in still air or did you do a 4 quadrant test? Vbg is a still air number. As you know, in a headwind you must increase the IAS (and reduce in a tailwind) to obtain best distance (which, after all, is the whole point of this in an engine out situation). The descent rate would change as well depending on wind vector.
No such complexities. I don't know if 70 KIAS is best glide. All I'm saying is that, at 70 KIAS I observed ~700 fpm descent rate which would give a still air glide ratio of 10:1 (near sea level). Likely the real Vbg is slower.

[kwmoore]

I've now flown 2PL a bit over 40 hr since pickup. I've not had to add any oil, although it's probably used or blown out ~1/2 qt or so. It goes in for its first MX tomorrow: oil change, fix an INOP strobe, reinstall repaired JPI electronic tach, and repair or replace the right wing fuel drain which is leaking just perceptibly.

Yesterday was gorgeous, clear skies and nearly unlimited visibility at altitude, just had to go flying. Mt. Shasta was clearly visible from ~8500 feet over the north bay, all covered in snow! I took Tina and Byron out for some sightseeing and lunch at Nancy's at KWLW. Nancy's is well known among CA pilots for delicious, no frills food at reasonable prices and it did not disappoint.

The ride was mostly smooth except when we were downwind of some mountains (20-25 kt winds aloft from the NE). It was chilly on the ground, but just about ISA aloft. This gave a good chance to check performance:

7500 feet
42 deg F (about 7800 feet DA)
Altimeter 30.20
About 350 lb below MGTOW
Full throttle, 2500 rpm, leaned to about 150 deg F ROP (probably ~73% power), cowl flaps closed, all CHTs 360 or below: 135-137 KIAS, about 152-154 KTAS.
Full throttle, 2500 rpm, leaned to ~30-35 deg F LOP, cowl flaps closed, all CHTs 340 or below: 128-131 KIAS, 145-148 KTAS.

The plane was light and the temps cool, but I'm pretty pleased! Note that at this power setting (ROP) at 7500 feet the plane was still cruising near the top of the green arc. For this particular airframe under my typical conditions of use, the IO-550 is probably too much power (if there can be such a thing)--I'd have to run LOP always to stay below the yellow arc.

[jjbely]

Kevin,

What was your fuel flow when operating LOP ?

JJ

[kwmoore]

What was your fuel flow when operating LOP?
The FS450 read 12.6-12.8 gph. I'm not sure I've got it precisely calibrated; based on fill-ups it may be reading ~0.2-0.4 gph high, i.e. I take on somewhat less fuel than the FS450 says I should in most cases.

[N735GH]

Great looking Katmai and well thought out.

[nworth]

No such complexities. I don't know if 70 KIAS is best glide. All I'm saying is that, at 70 KIAS I observed ~700 fpm descent rate which would give a still air glide ratio of 10:1 (near sea level). Likely the real Vbg is slower.
I recently tried a four quadrant test at 70 ias. Ended up with a 10.43:1 glide ratio. Doing everything perfectly, and adjusting for wind, 11:1 is probably doable.

Also, after a Wing Waxers trip I did another speed run. Best I could coax was 153. But, I am routinely flying in the low 140's LOP which I consider excellent.

[kwmoore]

...after a Wing Waxers trip I did another speed run. Best I could coax was 153. But, I am routinely flying in the low 140's LOP which I consider excellent.
I think our two planes are virtually indistinguishable in speed. I do have the flap gap seals; without them I might be a tad slower. Looks like 2099X and 58565 are likely still champs.

[jjbely]

Kevin,

Wait a bit for N95803 soon coming out of the paint shop and a bit lighter, no chute :) I am planning to attend the Sedona migration on my way to California in late April early May. after completing a twin rating in Florida in April.

Cheers,

JJ

[kwmoore]

On my most recent trip (to check in on my Dad in Southern California) I flew past the 100 hr since delivery mark. On track for ~200 hr/year as projected :). So far no canceled flights and the plane's running great.

For grins I did an ROP speed check:

5500 feet
Full throttle
max rpm
Mixture leaned to ~150 deg F ROP
52 deg F OAT
About 2600 lb aircraft weight
141-142 KIAS (yellow arc!), or 154-155 KTAS

Of course, at this setting fuel flow was a whopping ~17.5 gph, not how I would choose to operate on a routine basis :rolleyes:.

Notable differences compared to my previous 260se's?

(a) Extra 4-5 kt at the low end (wing extensions), enabling 45-50 kt instead of 50-55 kt over the fence speeds for the same "feel;"

(b) Likely an additional 100-150 fpm climb rate (also wing extensions);

(c) Definitely faster, I have to pay more attention to staying out of the yellow arc. This plane is about as fast operating LOP as my 2nd one was operating ROP. It's probably the "straightest" airframe of the three and the wing extensions don't hurt in this area I'm sure;

(d) Most avionics bang-for-the-buck. I really love the GPSMAP496 and the 430w isn't bad either.

So far I'm very pleased. I plan to take it back to EQA for an annual after the Sedona fly-in.