Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

A little bit on the longer body being more aerodynamic.  If you look at it from a ballistics perspective, I could see why the longer birds were faster with same power.  Take a bullet built for long range (I shoot 1000 yd Benchrest competition by the way) like my 6mm 105 grain amax its long and skinny built for long range.  Then take a 100 grain spire point hunting bullet  for comparison.  The 105 amax has a ballistic coefficient of .5 and the 100 grain spire point a BC of .381 the higher the BC the better job the bullet has at keeping its velocity higher for a longer time ie: better for long range.


Take this theory to mooneys and look at a m20E that wieghs 1600lbs verses a 201J that wieghs 1675.  The longer plane wieghs about 4% more but is longer and the same diameter just like my long range bullet it the same diameter but longer and 4% heavier it still has a higher BC makeing it more effiecent at flying through the air!


 


And to brag just a bit I won the factory gun class in Iowa this summer shooting 5 bullets into a 6 inch group at 1000yds with 3 of the five being in the bulls eye thats 2.5 inches!  

Posted

Quote: iowaboy

A little bit on the longer body being more aerodynamic.  If you look at it from a ballistics perspective, I could see why the longer birds were faster with same power.  Take a bullet built for long range (I shoot 1000 yd Benchrest competition by the way) like my 6mm 105 grain amax its long and skinny built for long range.  Then take a 100 grain spire point hunting bullet  for comparison.  The 105 amax has a ballistic coefficient of .5 and the 100 grain spire point a BC of .381 the higher the BC the better job the bullet has at keeping its velocity higher for a longer time ie: better for long range.

Take this theory to mooneys and look at a m20E that wieghs 1600lbs verses a 201J that wieghs 1675.  The longer plane wieghs about 4% more but is longer and the same diameter just like my long range bullet it the same diameter but longer and 4% heavier it still has a higher BC makeing it more effiecent at flying through the air!

 

And to brag just a bit I won the factory gun class in Iowa this summer shooting 5 bullets into a 6 inch group at 1000yds with 3 of the five being in the bulls eye thats 2.5 inches!  

Posted

Your ganna laugh, but I've been competitive with a savage model 12BR in 6mmBR.  Have a Nightforce on it and just barely make weight for the factory gun class at 16lbs.  I shoot light gun class with it also and have done fairly well, haven't won anything in the big boys class yet but my times a comin!  

  • 12 years later...
Posted

Interesting thing.  In 1996 I went to Ukraine to fly some Soviet jets.

They are also flush riveted in the forward 1/2 to 2/3, then transition to standard rivets.  Even the supersonic Mig-29

Posted (edited)

Look at ANY modern supersonic military jet.

Tell me how many you find with super slick polished surfaces . Yes I know in the 50’s most all were.

Lastly laminar flow on a wing is really difficult to achieve, and very, very difficult on a riveted metal wing, I’d be surprised if our aircraft achieve the laminar flow we hope for.

I know mine doesn’t but I have not tufted it, and won’t. 

I’d expect that’s one of the advantages of a mold built composite wing, they should be able to control shapes and dimensions much more precisely and have a much better likelihood of achieving laminar flow.

In my opinion design wise there is a lot of drag in our fuselage back at the tail, the “wasp” shape really does reduce drag, but I bet would be really difficult to build with riveted metal, but that’s how I think a J model could lose quite a bit of drag.

The J model anyway, there just isn’t much if any low hanging fruit, and yet the J has a fixed step and antennas hanging out in the wind and how much does that slow it down? I guess that could be argued as low hanging fruit, how much does it cost to remove the step?

Edited by A64Pilot
Posted (edited)
On 12/6/2010 at 7:45 AM, Capt_CrashN_Burn said:

 

Quote: Lood

The cowl closure didn't result in any speed increase on my F. In my personal opinion, the best speed mods are tha 201 style cowling and windshield mods.

I got  somewhere between 3 and 5kts out of the lasar closure, one of the better upgrades i've done.

can't say the same for the hubcaps. 

best upgrade was just waxing the plane,  before the cowl closure that easily gave me 3 to 4 kts.  

Edited by McMooney
  • Like 2
Posted
On 12/5/2010 at 6:52 PM, Lood said:

The cowl closure didn't result in any speed increase on my F. In my personal opinion, the best speed mods are tha 201 style cowling and windshield mods.

The best speed mod is monroy tanks

Posted
21 minutes ago, Justin Schmidt said:

The best speed mod is monroy tanks

People may not understand that, but when I put Flint tip tanks on the 210 it took fuel from 90 gls to 120, which meant I never had to stop for fuel, or it was exceedingly rare if I did.

Fuel stops absolutely destroy average speed

Posted
5 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

People may not understand that, but when I put Flint tip tanks on the 210 it took fuel from 90 gls to 120, which meant I never had to stop for fuel, or it was exceedingly rare if I did.

Fuel stops absolutely destroy average speed

Especially when in a long line and took 1.5 hrs to get some fuel

Posted

Cowl enclosure increased by 3 kts or so.. really marginal and almost undetectable. The cooling ,however, was very noticeable and worth the $500 (used) I think I paid. Plus I do feel it looks a little better. 

Posted
1 hour ago, M20Doc said:

If my Aspen is correct, 190 kts plus is pretty typical between 8-10K

Since you are up early, I'm curious if that is your daily driver, or do you reserve it for trips where speed and hauling capacity matter?

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.