![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I fly a Ventus CT with a Cambridge 302 and an Ipaq using Winpilot.
Flying yesterday I checked the IAS shown on the 302, I noticed that it is giving totally different readings to the mechanical ASI. eg at 50kts on the mechanical, the 302 showed 40kts at 70kts the 302 showed 63 kts. I did not check at higher speeds to see if the difference reduced further. I am reasonably sure the mechanical ASI is probably correct, (if it was 10kts out on finals it would be an interesting approach) !!. I checked the IAS as I have been doubting the wind shown on Winpilot, if it is using the IAS fron the 302 and that is in error, then that would explain the wind problem. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what can cause such a difference betwen the mechanical ASI and the 302?? Thanks Ross |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Start by checking the setup calibration numbers listed in the manual. Maybe
zero airspeed is wrong, therefore every speed is off by that amount. "Ross Biggar" wrote in message ... I fly a Ventus CT with a Cambridge 302 and an Ipaq using Winpilot. Flying yesterday I checked the IAS shown on the 302, I noticed that it is giving totally different readings to the mechanical ASI. eg at 50kts on the mechanical, the 302 showed 40kts at 70kts the 302 showed 63 kts. I did not check at higher speeds to see if the difference reduced further. I am reasonably sure the mechanical ASI is probably correct, (if it was 10kts out on finals it would be an interesting approach) !!. I checked the IAS as I have been doubting the wind shown on Winpilot, if it is using the IAS fron the 302 and that is in error, then that would explain the wind problem. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what can cause such a difference betwen the mechanical ASI and the 302?? Thanks Ross |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ross Biggar wrote:
I fly a Ventus CT with a Cambridge 302 and an Ipaq using Winpilot. Flying yesterday I checked the IAS shown on the 302, I noticed that it is giving totally different readings to the mechanical ASI. eg at 50kts on the mechanical, the 302 showed 40kts at 70kts the 302 showed 63 kts. I did not check at higher speeds to see if the difference reduced further. I am reasonably sure the mechanical ASI is probably correct, (if it was 10kts out on finals it would be an interesting approach) !!. I checked the IAS as I have been doubting the wind shown on Winpilot, if it is using the IAS fron the 302 and that is in error, then that would explain the wind problem. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what can cause such a difference betwen the mechanical ASI and the 302?? Some obvious ones a * bad calibration on the 302 * 302 and ASI are on different pitot/static systems But I think the problem is the 302 airspeed zero offset is incorrect. The numbers you give can be explained completely by a zero offset in the 302. From the manual: Screen #10 (0) shows sensor readings as follows: · Indicated Airspeed (IAS) in knots or km/hr. · Airspeed Indicator (ASI) zero offset (should be less than 1000). So, you can check it. Regardless of the outcome, I suggest a call to Cambridge about the problem. With luck, it will be something you can correct yourself with a calibration command of some sort. -- Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell Washington State USA |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The 302 has no facility for the user to perform airspeed
adjustment for static errors. On the gound in zero wind my 302 airspeed often showed several knots of positive reading. These 2 aspects perturbed me when I had a 302 and as there was no information in the manual I asked Cambridge and was told that it did some self calibration thing when it flew and that in the air the 302 airspeed reading should be accurate - which turned out to be true. So checking what your 302 reads on the ground is not going to give you much information about your problem. On the other hand if you put the 302 and your ASI on the bench and give them some shared pressure to the pitot inputs and compare readings you might learn something. Errors as large as described seem excessive for positional static errors even if the ASI and 302 are on different statics so that would suggest either a pneumatic tube problem or a sensor problem. The bench test would give you an idea of which and if it looks like the 302 sensor is duff you could contact Gary Kammerer at Cambridge for advice. ) John Galloway At 00:12 15 August 2005, Bob Fidler wrote: Start by checking the setup calibration numbers listed in the manual. Maybe zero airspeed is wrong, therefore every speed is off by that amount. 'Ross Biggar' wrote in message ... I fly a Ventus CT with a Cambridge 302 and an Ipaq using Winpilot. Flying yesterday I checked the IAS shown on the 302, I noticed that it is giving totally different readings to the mechanical ASI. eg at 50kts on the mechanical, the 302 showed 40kts at 70kts the 302 showed 63 kts. I did not check at higher speeds to see if the difference reduced further. I am reasonably sure the mechanical ASI is probably correct, (if it was 10kts out on finals it would be an interesting approach) !!. I checked the IAS as I have been doubting the wind shown on Winpilot, if it is using the IAS fron the 302 and that is in error, then that would explain the wind problem. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what can cause such a difference betwen the mechanical ASI and the 302?? Thanks Ross |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Another Cambridge 302 logger bug | [email protected] | Soaring | 8 | July 19th 05 04:05 PM |
Cambridge Aero Explorer Fix | Guy Byars | Soaring | 8 | May 19th 04 03:04 AM |
Inaccurate airspeed indicator | Wyatt Emmerich | Instrument Flight Rules | 20 | April 20th 04 12:08 AM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |
Updated IGC approval documents for Cambridge GNSS flight recorders | Ian Strachan | Soaring | 0 | August 27th 03 05:28 PM |