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
|
|||
|
|||
Static Port for Fairchild 24
A friend is restoring a Fairchild 24. It did not have a static
port... iinstruments just vented to cabin. He's wondering where one might install a pair, one per side. Any experience on this? It isn't real fast so it might not matter. Bill Hale |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Static Port for Fairchild 24
In article .com,
" wrote: A friend is restoring a Fairchild 24. It did not have a static port... instruments just vented to cabin. He's wondering where one might install a pair, one per side. Any experience on this? It isn't real fast so it might not matter. Does anyone know why the sides of the fuselage, mid-way between the cabin and the tail surfaces is uses on many aircraft? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Static Port for Fairchild 24
john smith wrote:
In article .com, " wrote: A friend is restoring a Fairchild 24. It did not have a static port... instruments just vented to cabin. He's wondering where one might install a pair, one per side. Any experience on this? It isn't real fast so it might not matter. Does anyone know why the sides of the fuselage, mid-way between the cabin and the tail surfaces is uses on many aircraft? When choosing a site for a static port the most important consideration is turbulence at and near the port. In the aircraft you have seen that's the smoothest area. Mounting static ports on opposite sides of the aircraft "averages" the pressures sensed which greatly reduces errors. Airliners do it, but I can't see it in home builts. If you have a noticeable error with a properly installed static port you have bigger problems. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Static Port for Fairchild 24
Dan wrote:
john smith wrote: In article .com, " wrote: A friend is restoring a Fairchild 24. It did not have a static port... instruments just vented to cabin. He's wondering where one might install a pair, one per side. Any experience on this? It isn't real fast so it might not matter. Does anyone know why the sides of the fuselage, mid-way between the cabin and the tail surfaces is uses on many aircraft? When choosing a site for a static port the most important consideration is turbulence at and near the port. In the aircraft you have seen that's the smoothest area. Mounting static ports on opposite sides of the aircraft "averages" the pressures sensed which greatly reduces errors. Airliners do it, but I can't see it in home builts. If you have a noticeable error with a properly installed static port you have bigger problems. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired I'm a tad surprised this question received so little feedback. Here's a bit gained from 30+ years' worth of a sailplane guy's perspective... In a nutshell, "What Dan said." That noted, many (not all) sailplanes obtain their ROC pneumatic info from pitot-static ports, and the developers of variometers and total-energy compensators have learned a great deal of how very difficult it is to obtain accurate static pressure. For sailplanes, sensing static pressure in the cockpit doesn't cut it for total energy compensation - it typically varies from 'real' static due to pressure or suction effects, depending on speed, setting of vents, etc. Similarly, getting static from nose ports or underwing ports generally suffers from speed-dependent flow-field effects (pressure/suction). In the 1970's it was learned that fuselage ports somewhere between 50% and 70% of the way from the wing T.E. to the vertical fin L.E. tended to be pretty good on many sailplanes, but flap effects and the nature of the method of making the port holes (by then, usually in fiberglass) couldn't be ignored. Probably most common today are static ports on a vertical-stab-mounted probe perhaps 12-18 inches ahead of the fin L.E. I can see why in a draggy, relatively low-powered ship (e.g. Fairchild 24) using cockpit static would be acceptable (especially given the ship's vintage and knowledge existing when it was built). In the absence of a free-stream probe for sensing static, my guess is aft fuselage side statics would likely be a decent compromise in your friend's restoration. Of course, if the ship isn't experimental, there might be type certification issues... Regards, Bob Whelan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Blow out static port | [email protected] | Owning | 36 | May 13th 05 02:59 PM |
Is my static port leaking? | Derrick Early | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | August 15th 04 01:13 AM |
Why a static port? | Paul Mennen | Owning | 11 | August 19th 03 04:58 AM |
Is a static port a precision thing? | Larry Smith | Home Built | 8 | August 12th 03 10:26 PM |
Canard static port location | Paul Lee | Home Built | 1 | July 12th 03 02:55 AM |