Anyone got any info data on speed with a fastback ?
Anyone done any tuft testing on the aft portion of the stock canpies ?
Did Dave Anders go faster after he fastbacked his 4 ?
Thanks
Mike
Jet do you have any pictures you could post?
JetJ01 said:Of course it is faster, otherwise it would be called a Slowback! And with the same reasoning, you don't have to see behind you because you are going so fast no one can get or stay back there!
does anyone know of a quick release system for either the standard or fastback canopy? In other words, wear a parachute and the ability to shed the canopy and get out!
Looking for a picture of the latching mechanism on the canopy please.
Anyone got any info data on speed with a fastback ?
Anyone done any tuft testing on the aft portion of the stock canpies ?
Did Dave Anders go faster after he fastbacked his 4 ?
Thanks Mike
...17 posts and no one has answered the question. I would be interested in some (scientific) data on the trade out between a possible drag reduction from the shape and the drag increase from the added wetted area.
I transformed my RV-4 from a standard turtle deck (finished in 1992) to a fastback over a 90 day period during the winter of 2009. I think I gained as much as 5 knots, but can't say for certain, since I didn't keep accurate records in its original configuration. If I didn't gain any speed, I'm still happy I made the conversion, if for no other reason than the "looks".
With an 0-360, regular constant speed (not blended airfoil) I consistently cruise at 9,500 ft. with 7.5 gallon/hr fuel burn showing 174 knot TAS.
See before and after photos:
https://picasaweb.google.com/jaknjoan/20100415RV4FastbackModification
On my flight to and from OSH last year, I was flying with a friend with a well done RV-4 running an 0-320 with a Sensenich prop. Each fuel stop I used less fuel than he did. Bottom line, in my opinion there are speed benefits in the conversion.
Jake Thiessen
Independence, OR