National Aeronca Association Bulletin Board

[/quote]
In the mean time, I paid nearly 800 dollars a month over a period of 5 months for a hangar I could not use. I will say however, Compton is still the best kept secret in the south bay, may it never get a control tower. Rod[/quote]


Wheew....I won't be complaining about my $170 month for my electric bifold door hanger here in middle TN again. I do remember once tying down my 7DC over by the NE side of the runways at Compton. I looked out the final, saw two planes really, really close to each other on final. Figured either my eyes were messed up or they were each lined up to land on the two different runways. While scratching my head, saw them both pop up into the sky kinda vertical climb, heard the noise of metal crunching, and watched a Luscombe and a C150 drop like falling leaves onto the approach end of the runways with big thuds and lots of dust. They had hit each other. Totaled both planes but nobody hurt. Later in the year, our Cessna dealer at LGB would send students off to Compton to get some pattern time over there (heyday of VA flight training and LGB was 4th busiest in country at time). Two of them headed off that way to Compton. Typical smoggy day in L.A. back then. Both turned downwind at Compton. First turned base, second lost sight of first, turned base. First landed, started rolling out. Second landed perfectly on top of the first, main gear making two perfect wheel dents in the top of the first's fuel tanks, bounced off the first cleanly onto the runway ahead of him, and taxied in first. And many more mid '70s LGB, Compton, TOA, etc stories where those came from. roger

Roger Anderson wrote:

In the mean time, I paid nearly 800 dollars a month over a period of 5 months for a hangar I could not use. I will say however, Compton is still the best kept secret in the south bay, may it never get a control tower. Rod[/quote]


Wheew....I won't be complaining about my $170 month for my electric bifold door hanger here in middle TN again. I do remember once tying down my 7DC over by the NE side of the runways at Compton. I looked out the final, saw two planes really, really close to each other on final. Figured either my eyes were messed up or they were each lined up to land on the two different runways. While scratching my head, saw them both pop up into the sky kinda vertical climb, heard the noise of metal crunching, and watched a Luscombe and a C150 drop like falling leaves onto the approach end of the runways with big thuds and lots of dust. They had hit each other. Totaled both planes but nobody hurt. Later in the year, our Cessna dealer at LGB would send students off to Compton to get some pattern time over there (heyday of VA flight training and LGB was 4th busiest in country at time). Two of them headed off that way to Compton. Typical smoggy day in L.A. back then. Both turned downwind at Compton. First turned base, second lost sight of first, turned base. First landed, started rolling out. Second landed perfectly on top of the first, main gear making two perfect wheel dents in the top of the first's fuel tanks, bounced off the first cleanly onto the runway ahead of him, and taxied in first. And many more mid '70s LGB, Compton, TOA, etc stories where those came from. roger[/quote]

We have been lucky lately--no horror stories like the ones you just toldOur only problems now seem to come from the helocoptors who don't seem to understand airport etiquette(sp?). I had a student on the take-off roll when a large helo alongside the runway lifted off. I knew what the results would be so I was prepared. As we passed, the rotor wash took our little 150 for quite a ride, but it was great experience for the student. Rod

Back to the LYC 0-145--I hooked a big game weighing scale unto the tail of my 1941 Chief and tied the other end to a fence post--object? to see how many static foot pounds of thrust the 0-145 would pull with a 36" X 70" sensenich prop. Any guesses? I have a new 32" x 70" Sensenich on order, it will be an interesting comparison. As a hint as to the static pounds of thrust developed, I will tell you that a Piper J-3 with a very good 85 HP Cont. developed 335 lbs of static thrust. The constant from these two tests seems to be 3.8 X HP =static thrust. These tests were extremely crude, but do form a chart for comparison. I wonder what a 65 hp Continental would pull? OK, enough already, any guesses?
Rod

Not much interest in my post above. Not one guess, so I will report my results. My 0-145 pulled 250 lbs (static thrust) on a 75 degree day. Once I get my 32" Sensenich on I will try again and see what the results are.

Rodney Zapf wrote:Not much interest in my post above. Not one guess, so I will report my results. My 0-145 pulled 250 lbs (static thrust) on a 75 degree day. Once I get my 32" Sensenich on I will try again and see what the results are.

I'm not sure how this compares to other, similar engines...?

I am not sure how it compares to other 65's either. I thought my experiments might spur an interest and someone with a Continental 65 might give it a try, or for that matter, another LYC 0-145 as a comparison. It is such a simple test. It was introduced to me by Volmer Jensen, designer of the Jensen V-22 seaplane. It seems that the seaplane owners have more of an interest in this experiment than others. I recently did the same test on a Lyc 100 hp on a "Champ" and the results were 350 lbs of static thrust versus 335 lbs for an 85 hp. Using my formula of 3.8 X rated horse power, that was a little disappointing as I had expected around 380 lbs (we were not sure of the pitch of the prop however the blades had been shortened which would cause a thrust reduction).

Rodney Zapf wrote:I am not sure how it compares to other 65's either. I thought my experiments might spur an interest and someone with a Continental 65 might give it a try, or for that matter, another LYC 0-145 as a comparison. It is such a simple test. It was introduced to me by Volmer Jensen, designer of the Jensen V-22 seaplane. It seems that the seaplane owners have more of an interest in this experiment than others. I recently did the same test on a Lyc 100 hp on a "Champ" and the results were 350 lbs of static thrust versus 335 lbs for an 85 hp. Using my formula of 3.8 X rated horse power, that was a little disappointing as I had expected around 380 lbs (we were not sure of the pitch of the prop however the blades had been shortened which would cause a thrust reduction).

This brings to mind watt meters on bicycles...

It can only bring disappointment.

Well Dan, I appreciate your thoughts but I respectfully disagree. I do thank you for taking enough interest to respond. With regards, and not to beat a dead horse, I believe the loss of the 30 lbs of thrust that we had expected out of the 100 may be due to the several inches of prop tip that had been removed. I am very anxious to see what my new 32" Sensenich adds to the equation. To me, the static thrust experiment is just too simple to totally disregard. I am hoping there are a few Chief/Champ enthusiasts that will join me in this experiment...the 0-145 has always taken a "back seat" to the Continental 65 and that is the reason I started this experiment--I would just like to know how big this "back seat" is.

Rodney Zapf wrote:Well Dan, I appreciate your thoughts but I respectfully disagree. I do thank you for taking enough interest to respond. With regards, and not to beat a dead horse, I believe the loss of the 30 lbs of thrust that we had expected out of the 100 may be due to the several inches of prop tip that had been removed. I am very anxious to see what my new 32" Sensenich adds to the equation. To me, the static thrust experiment is just too simple to totally disregard. I am hoping there are a few Chief/Champ enthusiasts that will join me in this experiment...the 0-145 has always taken a "back seat" to the Continental 65 and that is the reason I started this experiment--I would just like to know how big this "back seat" is.

I'm fairly happy with my O-145, though a top OH is in the near future (too many years idle since last OH).

It will lift me an a passenger to cruising altitude (up to 1000' AGL) and airspeed (75-80 MPH) in temps below 70 F, burns 3.5 to 4 GPH, leaks a tiny bit of oil, and starts on the first or second throw.

I'm not sure what else I need to know that won't have me lusting for more power, more lift capability, more, more, more...

But that's just me. Once I learn how anemic this 70 year old powerplant really is with hard numbers.. well... it won't be good.

Hi Dan, glad you are happy, cause I am happy too! Mighty proud of my 41 Chief! In fact, I love the little bugger! but always interested in hearing what the other guy has and whether or not I am leaving any unturned cards on the table. I climb mine at 60 mph and cruise at 75 to 80 using 2400 rrrr's to keep 'r there. Rod

Rodney Zapf wrote:Hi Dan, glad you are happy, cause I am happy too! Mighty proud of my 41 Chief! In fact, I love the little bugger! but always interested in hearing what the other guy has and whether or not I am leaving any unturned cards on the table. I climb mine at 60 mph and cruise at 75 to 80 using 2400 rrrr's to keep 'r there. Rod

I usually takeoff and do initial climb at 50, then drop the nose a bit to get 60 to start crosswind turn (Vx keeps me closer to the runway).

I usually cruise at 2450 or so. I have a Sensenich metal prop, but some day will swap for an original-looking wood prop.

Dan, I can only get to 2450 rpm by running WOT, that is why I am going from a 36" pitch to a 32 " prop. I believe your metal prop is also more efficient than the woody--I wanted the original woody look but should have stuck with a 34" prop. What would be a good rpm for cruise? 75 percent--would be how many rpm's?? I have heard that WOT, straight and level should result in 2550 rated rpm. Sensenich reps tell me that if I drop 4 inches of pitch (36 to 32) I should gain 200 rpm. Rod

Rodney Zapf wrote:Dan, I can only get to 2450 rpm by running WOT, that is why I am going from a 36" pitch to a 32 " prop. I believe your metal prop is also more efficient than the woody--I wanted the original woody look but should have stuck with a 34" prop. What would be a good rpm for cruise? 75 percent--would be how many rpm's?? I have heard that WOT, straight and level should result in 2550 rated rpm. Sensenich reps tell me that if I drop 4 inches of pitch (36 to 32) I should gain 200 rpm. Rod

Yep -- WOT in level cruise should result in 2550 RPM -- which is where I am once everything's warmed up. I see 2300-2400 on takeoff (lots of load).

I have the LB 0-145, what is the difference between the LA and the LB?

The 65LB is also the military L-3G and is the same as the 50/65LA except minor structural changes and engine installation. The 65LB (L-3G) is authorized for the Lycoming 0-145-B2 and the O-145-93. Check Type certificate A-702.

Doug