What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Join the 200Kt club

n700jl

Well Known Member
I know that I have had some amazing flights in my O-320 powered RV-6. I bet you have to! Post your picture of you GPS or EFIS to show you fastest ground speed. The fastest speed wins free bragging rights!

Best regards,
Jon Hubbell
 
Last edited:
I know this will be topped by a Rocket in no time, but lemme bask in the glory of 252 knots for a minute... (BTW, that's 290 mph for you MPH guys)
20051226_252_knots.jpg
 
Last edited:
Where?

Wow!! That's almost a 90 MPH tailwind! Where did you happen to find that kinda tailwind, Dan? My best has been 245 MPH after a cold front came through at 8500'.

Pierre
 
Scott DellAngelo said:
Oh come on Smokey or someone. He didn't clarify it had to be an RV. :D Let's see some really big numbers. :eek:
Well then, I'm pretty sure Paul's coworkers in the shuttle will take the prize. The shuttle orbits with a GS roughly 15,217 kts, right? ;)

b,
d
 
Slowest and Lowest?

How about slowest and lowest.... :)
(In the "trench" 500 agl at 90kts in a C-170)

img0355iu2.jpg

Dave C
-7 Flying
 
Due to an inverted antenna, one day I had a 842 knot GS! I did not have my camera on board that day. :(

Turbo Subies are fast but not that fast!
 
DeltaRomeo said:
The shuttle orbits with a GS roughly 15,217 kts, right? ;)


Yeah....roughly! :cool:


Now what I want to see in these photos is proof that you were LEVEL at the time!
 
rv6ejguy said:
Due to an inverted antenna, one day I had a 842 knot GS! I did not have my camera on board that day. :(
Huh? :confused: :confused: Can you clarify this?

GPS antennas don't care which direction they're pointed. They're simply taking the time deltas from all the satellites' signals (and processing precision position data from the bird) and computing the receiver's position.
 
Jamie said:
Near zero drag does not count. :p


Oh, you just need to think outside the box! Drag is the product of Drag Coefficient and Dynamic Pressure, right? Everyone reduces drag by attacking Drag Coefficient, but nobody ever just reduces the Q-Bar to zero!! :rolleyes:

However you get to near-zero drag is good, isn't it? :D

Paul
 
Jamie said:
Huh? :confused: :confused: Can you clarify this?

GPS antennas don't care which direction they're pointed. They're simply taking the time deltas from all the satellites' signals (and processing precision position data from the bird) and computing the receiver's position.

The Bendix Skymap IIIC has a hinged antenna which was mounted on the glare shield. During maintenance, it was inadvertently flipped down. Not only was the speed whacky but position was off about 15 miles. I don't know the technical nuances but when flipped back the proper way, normal function returned at the same time.
 
rv6ejguy said:
The Bendix Skymap IIIC has a hinged antenna which was mounted on the glare shield. During maintenance, it was inadvertently flipped down. Not only was the speed whacky but position was off about 15 miles. I don't know the technical nuances but when flipped back the proper way, normal function returned at the same time.

Ahh..I guess if you were getting bad signals and your location was jumping around -- that makes sense. If you jumped 15 miles from your current position in two seconds it would calculate some pretty darn high speeds. :)

The only reason I pointed it out was I had a very trusted friend come over to my house and checked out my project when it was still in the garage. He looked at my antenna and said, "yeah, your GPS antenna mount looks good, but you've got it mounted backward -- it's going to show you going backward".

I stared at it for a second and he just cracked up laughing.
 
Yeah, my airplane ICON made a very fast 2-3 second trip across the screen- trouble was the scene outside did not match the screen... what the... I was movin' like a UFO. :cool:

Oops, way over 250 knots in the control zone! :D
 
Ironflight said:
Oh, you just need to think outside the box! Drag is the product of Drag Coefficient and Dynamic Pressure, right? Everyone reduces drag by attacking Drag Coefficient, but nobody ever just reduces the Q-Bar to zero!! :rolleyes:
However you get to near-zero drag is good, isn't it? :D
Paul
Jerry Maguire: I love you. You... you complete me. And I just...
Dorothy: Shut up, just shut up. You had me at "reducing Q-bar to zero".

And that is why I'm not a screenwriter....:p
 
299.6 mph (260.5 knots)

I hope RV-10's can enter too. I figured since you were building one it would be OK.

I know I have 299.6 mph on my Garmin 430. I hit it while decending from 12,500 into St. George UT. The tail wind was right around 80-90 mph.
I will get a picture next time I'm at the hanger. I was most upset at myself that I didn't hit 300 mph. I only needed .4 mph. If I would have just decreased a little more drag I could have made it.

I know it should be in knots. I keep everything in knots except my 430. People in the back can easily see the 430 and they like to know speed in mph. If it is in knots, I get the question "how fast is that in mph?"
 
Last edited:
254mph

pierre smith said:
Wow!! That's almost a 90 MPH tailwind! Where did you happen to find that kinda tailwind, Dan? My best has been 245 MPH after a cold front came through at 8500'.

Pierre


Well,,, here?s mine. :D This was a few months ago flying from Albuquerque, NM back too Oklahoma at 11,500'..... Had a decent tailwind! :) I think someone from up above was telling me to get my tail home very soon and get the you know what out of N.M. B.T.W.,,, it was a bad date anyway. She was not my type. :eek:

dsc08599qr2.jpg
 
A year and a half ago, I was making 209 KTS between Medford, Oregon and Eugene in my 0-320 powered RV-6. I had taken a friend to Medford to pick up a 180 hp RV-6A. He took off before I did and I landed at Eugene before he did. To be fair, he landed on the parallel runway and the tower made him extend his downwind. I was on the ground about 30 seconds ahead of him.
 
Dosen't count....

Dave C said:
How about slowest and lowest.... :)
(In the "trench" 500 agl at 90kts in a C-170)

img0355iu2.jpg

Dave C
-7 Flying
You were still at 4793 ft.
You need to head over to death valley. :eek:

Kent
 
Knots to You....

I love it AJ...."When I have to run from a bad date, I get in my 200 mph+ airplane and leave the state!" :p

Now I know how all you speed demons like to use mph goes the numbers are bigger, but hey, if that's all you want, why not post in kph? I had a professor back in college (Senior Design, Aeronautical Engineering) that would not even accept a paper or report if all the units weren't in Knots...."That's the units we use in aviation kids, like it or 'knot' !"

Hmm....I need to keep that camera charged and along - got some long trips coming up, and maybe I can catch a wind....

Paul
 
Yah but you have to stay 2000 agl over national park airspace so you still can't get a neg MSL indication. I've considered it before and don't think there is anywhere to get a neg MSL???

Am I right about the 2000agl even??
 
Am I right about the 2000agl even

Yep:

Pilots are requested to maintain a minimum altitude of 2,000 feet above the surface of the following: National Parks, Monuments, Seashores, Lakeshores, Recreation Areas and Scenic Riverways administered by the National Park Service, National Wildlife Refuges, Big Game Refuges, Game Ranges and Wildlife Ranges administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Wilderness and Primitive areas administered by the U.S. Forest Service.

NOTE-
FAA Advisory Circular AC 91-36, Visual Flight Rules (VFR) Flight Near Noise-Sensitive Areas, defines the surface of a national park area (including parks, forests, primitive areas, wilderness areas, recreational areas, national seashores, national monuments, national lakeshores, and national wildlife refuge and range areas) as: the highest terrain within 2,000 feet laterally of the route of flight, or the upper-most rim of a canyon or valley.


The above is clearly depicted on all US sectionals.
 
200kt club

This has been fun reading everyones stories. These are amazing airplanes keep building!
 
Neg MSL

grantcarruthers said:
Yah but you have to stay 2000 agl over national park airspace so you still can't get a neg MSL indication. I've considered it before and don't think there is anywhere to get a neg MSL???

Am I right about the 2000agl even??

If you were sitting at sea level and the temp was below 59 degrees f and/or the barometric pressure was > 29.92, you would get negative Density Altitude.

In the same situation, if the barometric pressure was > 29.92, you would get a negative Pressure Altitude.

You would physically have to be below sea level to get a negative MSL with the altimeter set correctly.

Is my thinking flawed?
 
Last edited:
Furnace Creek Airport (L06)

Elevation: -210 ft

A low pass should get you -180 or so. :p

Kent
 
I see what's happening here. Nobody could beat 252 knots (290 mph) groundspeed, so the conversation shifted to density altitude. What a copout...

C'mon, Kahuna -- I know you've seen faster than 252 knots GS!

And Rocket guys, I know you don't fly your airplanes more than about twice a year because of how expensive they are to operate, but c'mon, I know you can beat 252 knots GS!

Muuaahahahaha. :D
 
Join the 200KTS Club

Just a little hopp from PHX to 5T6 (Santa Teresa, NM). Felt like we were "Coming Down The Shute" @ Reno Air Races. The Pic was from the hotel room when Lovey was reviewing our flight. I told her, "Take a photo, that ones a keeper!" Don't know if we can duplicate it for LOE '07 but, we're gonna try. 282.6 KTS

Michael Taylor (EMPTY)
N164MT
RV-6 L-0360, Hartzell C/S


p4100001qv2.jpg
[/IMG]
 
Ah, now see, you should have stipulated more stringent requirements. Anyone who's got a High altitude to low altitude descent can come up with some pretty spectacular speeds (staying away from VNE obviously). But I think this needs to be refined....

How about 200kts of GS or better in *cruise level*. I'm sure I could dig up a few of those, but I suspect that would be cheating... On a flight from ATL to ORL at 15000, with an indicated of 145, a TAS of 190, it doesn't take much of a tailwind to get ahead of 200kts in GS in level flight...

Anyway, I think the rules need to be defined as above.... 200kts or better in a descent just simply isn't fair... :)
 
Ironflight said:
... I had a professor back in college (Senior Design, Aeronautical Engineering) that would not even accept a paper or report if all the units weren't in Knots....
Paul
I once had a teacher offer extra credit if we converted our speeds to furlongs per millifortnight.
 
I'd join the group, but I only fly my comany's Cessna 310-R Bearcat, I certainly don't own it! And the best I've seen level flight has only been in the 230 knot range, so take a bow Dan, your 200 h.p. rocket is faster than a 600 h.p. twin!! :D
 
tobinbasford said:
Yep:

Pilots are requested to maintain a minimum altitude of 2,000 feet above the surface of the following: National Parks, Monuments, Seashores, Lakeshores, Recreation Areas and Scenic Riverways administered by the National Park Service, National Wildlife Refuges, Big Game Refuges, Game Ranges and Wildlife Ranges administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Wilderness and Primitive areas administered by the U.S. Forest Service.

NOTE-
FAA Advisory Circular AC 91-36, Visual Flight Rules (VFR) Flight Near Noise-Sensitive Areas, defines the surface of a national park area (including parks, forests, primitive areas, wilderness areas, recreational areas, national seashores, national monuments, national lakeshores, and national wildlife refuge and range areas) as: the highest terrain within 2,000 feet laterally of the route of flight, or the upper-most rim of a canyon or valley.


The above is clearly depicted on all US sectionals.

I have a question pretaining to this. I have asked CFI's before and they could never give me a definitive answer. The rules say "requested", not "required". So is it a violation or just a complaint that you would receive? I hear about people flying down the canyons of Lake Powell all the time and when I am there, you will see F-15's, B-1's, B-52's ect... buzzing Lake Powell at 100 ft. agl. quite often. It is the coolest thing ever.
Maybe there is someone with experience on this one.
 
grantcarruthers said:
Yah but you have to stay 2000 agl over national park airspace so you still can't get a neg MSL indication. I've considered it before and don't think there is anywhere to get a neg MSL???

Yep. You can land at Furnace Creek (we flew the RV there a few months ago for some extreme hiking ;-)):

http://www.airnav.com/airport/L06

-210 MSL field elevation
 
Easy...

apatti said:
I once had a teacher offer extra credit if we converted our speeds to furlongs per millifortnight.
Ah... that's easy...

1 mph = 0.372 furlongs per milli fortnight (I think... :) ...)

gil in Tucson... remembering my English units.... yes we had to learn furlongs in school... :)
 
I have a question pretaining to this.

Scott,

I believe that it is only a "request" and violation would not result in any real punishment. However, remember what happened to the Grand Canyon several years ago (later 1980's??) when a ban was put on the Canyon for light aircraft and tour companies routes were severely restricted due to many, many complaints from park visitors. I always try to remain above requested altitudes in such noise sensitive areas for reasons like this.

As for the military, I can almost guarantee that when military aircraft are that low, and not flying on a designated low-level route and especially when over designated noise sensitive areas that the pilots are operating on their own and probably violating one of their sqdn's own rules. The following is from the latest OPNAV3710.7T, which is basically the bible for General Naval Aviation SOP and applies to Navy/Marine/Coast Guard:

5.5.1.2 Noise Sensitive and Wilderness
Areas.
These areas shall be avoided when at altitudes
of less than 3,000 feet AGL except when in
compliance with an approved:
a. Traffic or approach pattern
b. VR or IR route
c. Special use airspace.
Noise sensitive areas shall be avoided in the
development of IR and VR routes and additional special
use airspace unless the 3,000-foot criteria can be
observed.

Hope that helps a little.
 
Last edited:
tobinbasford said:
Scott,

I believe that it is only a "request" and violation would not result in any real punishment.

Hope that helps a little.

Thanks, that is what I've heard as well. I always do fly 2000+ above all the National Parks. It is really nice these days with EFIS systems giving us the distance above agl.
What wrecked the Grand Canyon was all the tour groups from Las Vegas. I wish they would have just banned the tour groups from flying low and in the Canyon and not general aviation. What really bothers me is they can actually fly lower than we can. That seems the opposite of what should have happened. Someone must have got a new car the day that rule went into effect.

Well, enough of the sidetrack.
Later-
 
Sign Me Up!

OK, I couldn't ressit the challenge, I really wanted to be a member of the 200 knot club... so I went by the hanger after work yesterday and did several speed mods on the airframe, reworked the cowling inlets and baffles, installed high compression pistons, installed 4 into 1 exhaust and really polished/waxed the plane... just so I could go 200 knots level in my -7!

img0445nm2.jpg


img0444tk1.jpg




:D I really didn't do any of those things... I just checked the winds alfot and went and found a 30 knot tailwind at 13.5'. But it really is 200 knots GS in level flight!

Dave C
-7 flying and having lots of fun!
 
200kt club

Congrats Dave C. This is the exact reason that I started this thread. Proof once again that these are great airplanes. This is motivation for the builders out there.
 
Jamie said:
Hey Dave C. I really like the "pilot's warning" on your panel. Awesome!

Jamie, thanks for pointing that out, I don't think I would have seen it otherwise.

I am DEFINITELY adding that to my panel when I build by RV!

-John
Dreaming of building an RV.....someday :rolleyes:
 
I seen 297 MPH coming back from Las Vegas, NV to Montezuma, KS at 17,500 ft. after the SEMA show in Vegas in 2005.
I am looking for a picture I took of the GPS that shows this, but I can't find it.
I pushed my throttle in and played with the prop and readjusted my mixture, but could not get it to hit 300 MPH.
 
thread bump

I'm in. 203kts GS in level flight and only had a 10kt push. I've been search for some smooth air to see what Aurora could do. Today I found out that 6200' 25.5"mp, 2550rpm will produce 193kts TAS. The EFIS pic wasn't readable due operator error. I think I'm still leaving a few knots on the table, which I hope to reel in with some fine tuning.
Flying257.jpg


Aurora at sunset
Flying262.jpg
 
I'm not exactly sure where or when this happened, but I can tell you didn't happen while the 496 was being used in my truck.

2011-10-20_17-01-49_899.jpg


BTW, that works out to 224 knots. :eek:

I look forward to the day when I get pulled over and the cop wants to use the GPS as proof I've been speeding. That number will make a judge sit up and take notice.
 
OK, I couldn't ressit the challenge, I really wanted to be a member of the 200 knot club... so I went by the hanger after work yesterday and did several speed mods on the airframe, reworked the cowling inlets and baffles, installed high compression pistons, installed 4 into 1 exhaust and really polished/waxed the plane... just so I could go 200 knots level in my -7!

img0445nm2.jpg


img0444tk1.jpg




:D I really didn't do any of those things... I just checked the winds alfot and went and found a 30 knot tailwind at 13.5'. But it really is 200 knots GS in level flight!

Dave C
-7 flying and having lots of fun!

Love your switch labeling! How did you do that?
 
Back
Top