Kingsley, For what it's worth my 914 mono XS + speed kit has given the
following figures in careful trials:
At 2000ft 100 kts TAS 12 litres/hr
110 " " 13 "
120 " " 14 "
130 " " 18 "
140 " " 23 "
At 10,000ft 150 " " 21 "
This suggests that unlike the 912S, the 914 is able to adjust
adequately for altitude, and I suppose that should be no surprise.
Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kingsley Hurst" <hurstkr@redzone.com.au>
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 10:35 AM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Re: does rotax need egt?
> <hurstkr@redzone.com.au>
>
>> Attachments:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/rotax_efficiency_125.pdf
>
> Hello Ira,
>
> Thank you for posting those figures . . . interesting indeed. 60%
> increase
> in fuel consumption flying at 9,000 ft as opposed to 3,000ft while TAS
> increases 33%.
>
> I note the increase in fuel consumption is almost linear from 3K to 7K ft
> while the increase between 7K and 9K is double that between 5K & 7K. I
> imagine 22.6" MP at 9K would be wide open throttle so I'm wondering if
> this
> kick in the consumption is because of power jets coming into play.
> Regardless, there is nothing that can be done about it with things as they
> are so I can certainly understand your desire to install a mixture
> control.
> I look forward to hearing how you accomplish this.
>
> Sorry I am unable to supply any comparative data yet.
>
> BTW, your MPG figures appear to actually be NMPG so your actual MPG is
> still
> way ahead of any motor vehicle travelling at 146 MPH. Realizing that may
> make you feel better No?
>
> Somewhere I saw once that Rotax actually do have true altitude
> compensating
> carburettors but for the life of me I cannot recall where I saw that.
>
> Cheers
> Kingsley
>
>
>
|