Glasair III owner here - intoduction

Anyone install a supercharger on a IO-540? I'm looking for another 20 knots of airspeed. Currently getting 215 knots and want 235 knots + and the ability to get it around 14-15k. I realize that a turbo is more efficient, but it would require cowling modification along with a lot of exhaust work that I do not want to do.
 
toddsanderson said:
Anyone install a supercharger on a IO-540? I'm looking for another 20 knots of airspeed. Currently getting 215 knots and want 235 knots + and the ability to get it around 14-15k. I realize that a turbo is more efficient, but it would require cowling modification along with a lot of exhaust work that I do not want to do.
Click to expand...


I had a very indepth look at this guys kit because of a real sad incident that was not the superchargers fault....

http://www.g3ignition.com/Supercharging.html

I found the components to be well thought out, high quality and pretty easy to install. IMHO.....

Just don't modify the intake mixture bypass with a manual device...:no:..:sad::sad::sad::sad::sad:
 
Todd, check out these guys. http://www.forcedaeromotive.com I had an email conversation with them, their system looks pretty good and there is at least one Glasair II with the system and he is quite happy with it. They told me they hadn't done a Glasair III but they saw no problems and said it wouldn't require any changes in the cowl. I'm considering it once Im flying if I still want more speed as you do.
 
Just made another 875 NM trip to FL with an intermediate stop in Knoxville. 3:56 flying time total with 60 gallons burned. Gross weight was 2720 on takeoff. I had my hand on the stick a total of maybe 5 minutes for takeoff and landing; otherwise, the G3X and autopilot flew the plane the entire trip. I could have went nonstop on the standard 74 gallons of fuel on board.

Thinking about installing the supercharger to get 75% HP at 14-15k.

Don't need any more power down low, just normalized power up high. Took off out of Knoxville DKX at 2730 lbs and 3500 ft of runway with plenty of room to spare. Climbed out at 2k per minute to 6k and then 1500-1000 FPM to 11k.

Averaged over 17 MPG - not too bad considering I was cruising at nearly 230 MPH.
 
Found another way to run the Glasair - Low and fast on rather low fuel flow. The winds coming home from FL were nearly 0 at the surface, 25 knot headwind at 3k, 35 at 6k, and 50 at 9k and above.

I usually come home up the middle of Florida through Lakeland, Ocala, - the usual routing. Since the weather was severe clear I decided to depart Venice over the Gulf instead and stay at 800 MSL until we hit the NW shore of Florida. We continued our West bias heading to Chattanooga instead of Knoxville which kept us in low terrain area at all times.

I'm teaching my son to fly, so I put him in the left seat and had him hand fly the plane for the first 1 1/2 hours. TAS was 199 knots using 75% power and 15.5 GPH. This was at a gross weight of 2720 lbs. Upon hitting the shore we increased our altitude to 2k and eventually 2600 ft going into Chattanooga. The winds shifted to a tailwind from the surface to 9k, so we again used 75% power and 15.5 GPH yielding 203 knots true with a ground speed over 230 knots at 5500 ft. The plane turns out to be very versatile down low as well as up high. It was a nice trip home. The trip down ended up being 3:56 and 4:15 heading back up North. Had I taken the normal route I would have had a headwind for 70% of the trip heading home. Burned a total of 124 gallons going 1800 miles and that included 4 takeoff and landings.
 

Attachments

  • Pilot.jpg
    Pilot.jpg
    1.6 MB · Views: 64
  • 5500ft.jpg
    5500ft.jpg
    473.1 KB · Views: 57
  • Tampa.jpg
    Tampa.jpg
    1.7 MB · Views: 49
  • Collegdale.jpg
    Collegdale.jpg
    1.5 MB · Views: 53
Todd Copeland said:
Todd, check out these guys. http://www.forcedaeromotive.com I had an email conversation with them, their system looks pretty good and there is at least one Glasair II with the system and he is quite happy with it. They told me they hadn't done a Glasair III but they saw no problems and said it wouldn't require any changes in the cowl. I'm considering it once Im flying if I still want more speed as you do.
Click to expand...

Considering that option, but after my most recent flight I am not sure I want it. The supercharger will use about 8 HP or so down low where you do not need the extra power which will make you burn more fuel. Up high I would have to see the benefit in person before investing. With the low displacement the blower has I am having a hard time understanding how it can provide the air needed at 14k to make the same power as I make now at 7k. I talked to the owner of FTA and he is a very nice guy. I would like to get a ride in the Glasair at 14k and verify the MP along with TAS gain.
 
toddsanderson said:
Found another way to run the Glasair - Low and fast on rather low fuel flow. The winds coming home from FL were nearly 0 at the surface, 25 knot headwind at 3k, 35 at 6k, and 50 at 9k and above.

I usually come home up the middle of Florida through Lakeland, Ocala, - the usual routing. Since the weather was severe clear I decided to depart Venice over the Gulf instead and stay at 800 MSL until we hit the NW shore of Florida. We continued our West bias heading to Chattanooga instead of Knoxville which kept us in low terrain area at all times.

I'm teaching my son to fly, so I put him in the left seat and had him hand fly the plane for the first 1 1/2 hours. TAS was 199 knots using 75% power and 15.5 GPH. This was at a gross weight of 2720 lbs. Upon hitting the shore we increased our altitude to 2k and eventually 2600 ft going into Chattanooga. The winds shifted to a tailwind from the surface to 9k, so we again used 75% power and 15.5 GPH yielding 203 knots true with a ground speed over 230 knots at 5500 ft. The plane turns out to be very versatile down low as well as up high. It was a nice trip home. The trip down ended up being 3:56 and 4:15 heading back up North. Had I taken the normal route I would have had a headwind for 70% of the trip heading home. Burned a total of 124 gallons going 1800 miles and that included 4 takeoff and landings.
Click to expand...

If you are going to fly low over water, you might as well get all the way down in ground effect and really help yourself out.
 
GAMI spread is now down to .4 GPH and runs fine down to -50F LOP. Have not run it leaner yet. I'm thinking that maybe # 4 and #6 should be adjusted down one more size to tighten the spread further.

Also showing a shot of the 45 minute reserve and full range fuel ring display on the map. Very neat feature. As you can see the ring adjusts according to winds. Bad day to go NW and good day to go SE.

Met with the interior guy today. Have decided to go all out on the interior with Mercedes carpet and Porsche leather and headliner material. I originally was just going to do a basic interior but after the paint and panel I just could not stop.
 

Attachments

  • GAMI1.jpg
    GAMI1.jpg
    823.9 KB · Views: 38
  • GAMI2.jpg
    GAMI2.jpg
    828 KB · Views: 36
  • Range Ring.jpg
    Range Ring.jpg
    652.4 KB · Views: 52
That is a cool feature Todd. Does it rely on you inputting numbers into the tank on fillup or does it calculate off the gauge? I wonder if my G3X has this feature. I know the touch screen is pretty much the same technology but they keep adding features I may not have.
 
It calculates the fuel from what you input instead of the gauge. It basically takes your fuel totalizer information and combines it with your GPS ground speed and air/data information to give you the range. You should have the same feature on your system. They just added it on the last software update.
 
A normal takeoff in the GIII 110 pounds under gross and 10 knot headwind. Off in 1000 ft, passed the camera at 100 knots and then pitched for 105 knots and maintained 4000 FPM to 3k ft and then 2200 FPM to 6500 ft at 140 knots indicated.

http://youtu.be/QyuIDFxlJVc
 
Yeah, it's good, but I want more power. This airframe could easily handle another 200HP. The supercharger is tempting, but the guys at GAMI claim it provides little power. The turbo is $50k and not something I want to mess with. I need to get a ride in the Glasair II with the supercharger and see what kind of real world performance he is getting.
 
toddsanderson said:
Yeah, it's good, but I want more power. This airframe could easily handle another 200HP. The supercharger is tempting, but the guys at GAMI claim it provides little power. The turbo is $50k and not something I want to mess with. I need to get a ride in the Glasair II with the supercharger and see what kind of real world performance he is getting.
Click to expand...


Hard to believe.... IMHO.....

Especially up high....
 
The guys at FAT claim that the supercharger only draws about 6-8 HP from the engine to make the boost needed to hold sea level power to 7k ft and roughly 75% power at 14k ft. The guys at GAMI claim that those numbers are not possible from the supercharger and that the induction air temperatures from the supercharger would be too high since it is not intercooled and would not provide adequate detonation margins.

What is interesting is that there is ZERO data on the entire internet about performance gains from the supercharger on any experimental aircraft. The only data I was able to find was from a guy that has a Lancair ES that previously had the supercharger. He said he removed it to install the turbo and that there is no comparison. It seems like someone would have made a video or blog about the system.

There is a Glasair II with the system. I have asked the owner to tell me what performance gains he has experienced. We shall see...
 
Seems everyone does normal takeoff a little different. I like to keep climb speeds somewhat higher. 120 kts until 500ft then 140 up to 2000 ft ish then cruise climb 160 - 180 kts depending on how big a hurry we are to get high and how hot it is out. Also better visibility over a big cowl keeping the nose lower where there is likely to be more traffic. Just my two cents.
 
N321SR said:
Seems everyone does normal takeoff a little different. I like to keep climb speeds somewhat higher. 120 kts until 500ft then 140 up to 2000 ft ish then cruise climb 160 - 180 kts depending on how big a hurry we are to get high and how hot it is out. Also better visibility over a big cowl keeping the nose lower where there is likely to be more traffic. Just my two cents.
Click to expand...


LOL, by "normal" I meant this is what the book says is the best rate of climb. I usually lift off at 70 knots, pitch for 90 raising the gear and transition to a 140 knot climb and 135 knots above 10k.
 
Todd Copeland said:
Todd,
There is an outfit in Washington state;
http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=9e46c6a6-0419-4021-a5f1-1a6a9e322b90
Read this, yes, more money than you wanted to spend but this is a turbo conversion to a 350hp engine package for your Glasair. If you want to increase your performance in a serious way, this is how to do it safely. It can also be done with the new IO-580 to get even more horses under the hood!
Click to expand...

Nice, but not going to happen. You are looking at $100k+ and lots of down time. I would buy a turbine legend before doing that.
 
It looks like high compression pistons are in order along with reworking the cylinders for better flow. I will only gain about 14 knots at 14k with the supercharger according to the Glasair II owner. Might gain 20 knots at 20k. I can gain 8-10 knots with high compression pistons and re-working the cylinders which is only $6k including labor, requires no cowling work, and no further maintenance. The supercharger is $24k. It was worth thinking about. I will also install a Sky-Tec high torque starter as well. Will need it to start the engine and will save 8 lbs as well.
 
That's a good common sense approach. I had my engine built with high compression. With my dual electronic ignition I'm well over the stock 300 horse power. The builder estimated (he didn't have a dyno) 350hp based on his test runs but I'm sure he was telling me things I wanted to hear after spending a lot of $ with him. Still should make me very happy. I'll know within a couple of months now, I'm getting very close to that first flight!
 
Yes, I think so. I have the single electronic ignition along with GAMI injectors; however, the engine is stock. I'm thinking that high compression Pistons will give me equivalent power at 11k that I now have at 7k. Should be good for at least 8 knots.
 
Might want to also take a look at performance engines when looking for someone to do your high compression top. I used Barrett but they have, in my opinion, been slipping in quality in the past years. Actually netting 30hp from such an increase in compression isn't as easy as changing the pistons. Don't forget the port work. ;)
 
N321SR said:
Might want to also take a look at performance engines when looking for someone to do your high compression top. I used Barrett but they have, in my opinion, been slipping in quality in the past years. Actually netting 30hp from such an increase in compression isn't as easy as changing the pistons. Don't forget the port work. ;)
Click to expand...

There is a lot you can do to improve the flow just in match porting before you even touch the pockets, but the pockets can't take a whole lot themselves without losing air/fuel mix quality.

The biggest thing though is to make a good balanced, tuned, Tri-Y pipe for it. Without good scavenging, you are wasting 3/4rs of every engine performance $ you spend.
 
Verified some speed yesterday trying different altitudes. It appears that 12500ft is the optimal altitude for speed, fuel economy, etc without using oxygen. 12.8 GPH yields 210 knots true at just about any altitude LOP from 6500 ft up; however, the fuel flow is about 1/2 GPH higher for every 1000 ft less than 12500 to get the same speed. While speed does not drop off much above 12500 the need for oxygen negates any gain in efficiency. At 15500 I was getting 209 knots using 11.2 GPH.

The plane goes in for interior this week. Looking forward to having it all 100% done. I have now flown the plane 50 hours and have not had a single squawk - only upgrades I wanted to perform. The airframe has been 100% repair free so far.
 

Attachments

  • 210 knots.jpg
    210 knots.jpg
    471.9 KB · Views: 53
  • ramp.jpg
    ramp.jpg
    1.7 MB · Views: 69
Should remain that way, gear maintanance is the only real thing to watch. The bearings on the elevators shows wear in some glasair III's at around 400 hours but I think it depends largely on the alignment and it sounds like yours was well built so you probably won't have trouble there. Do be careful when you eventually need to have the main tires replaced. They need to be exact replacements. Some have bought different brand tires etc which should have been identical and ended up with gear ups as the result. The wheel wells are tightly fit and it doesn't take much to hang up the gear coming down.
 
Yep, replaced the tires 3 weeks ago. Bought them at Desser tire. They were the only tires I could find in that size. They fit in the gear wells just fine. Did multiple gear extension and retraction tests to verify. The Glasair website is horrible for looking for parts. You have to call to find out anything. I also replaced all of my hydraulic lines in the gear system. They were 14 years old and beginning to leak. Plane now has no leaks oil or hydraulic fluid. I like it that way :)
 
Cool I'm looking to meet a pilot in norcal with a Glassair to get a feel for it as possible aircraft for my long XC missions.
 
toddsanderson said:
The guys at FAT claim that the supercharger only draws about 6-8 HP from the engine to make the boost needed to hold sea level power to 7k ft and roughly 75% power at 14k ft. The guys at GAMI claim that those numbers are not possible from the supercharger and that the induction air temperatures from the supercharger would be too high since it is not intercooled and would not provide adequate detonation margins.
Click to expand...

Induction air temperatures are easy to calculate. Any supercharger manufacturer can give you the compressor efficiency at given pressure ratio, and then it's a simple equation to calculate adiabatic heating. Easy as 1-2-3. Our simulations usually match within a tenth of a degC to the actual compressor output temps.
 
My interior is done. Mike Kiamy did the work and he did a great job. That is Porsche Leather with Mercedes carpet and headliner. The plane is finally done!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0622.JPG
    IMG_0622.JPG
    1.5 MB · Views: 115
  • IMG_0623.JPG
    IMG_0623.JPG
    1.7 MB · Views: 101
  • IMG_0626.JPG
    IMG_0626.JPG
    1.6 MB · Views: 105
  • IMG_0627.JPG
    IMG_0627.JPG
    1.7 MB · Views: 103
toddsanderson said:
My interior is done. Mike Kiamy did the work and he did a great job. That is Porsche Leather with Mercedes carpet and headliner. The plane is finally done!
Click to expand...

OUTSTANDING work......:thumbsup::thumbsup:..

Ps.. I "thought" the data tag had to be mounted on the outside, back by the tail, and not inside the cockpit.:dunno::idea:
 
Hi Ben,

There is a data tag on the tail as well. It has the serial number. Thanks for the comment.
 
Wow!! Look at that! An experimental with a grown up, professional interior! Looks factory built. Way to go!

So many experimentals look like crap inside, yours is actually finished. :yes:
 
Gorgeous! Glasairs, including the older ones, are on top of my wishlist. :)
 
Looks fantastic Todd. Where was it done? I already have the Oregon Aero cushions but I'm debating where to go for apholstry and interior. I'm nearly in the air now, just working through G3X setup and a couple of glitches I've found and I'll be airborn!
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    1.4 MB · Views: 69
Todd Copeland said:
Looks fantastic Todd. Where was it done? I already have the Oregon Aero cushions but I'm debating where to go for apholstry and interior. I'm nearly in the air now, just working through G3X setup and a couple of glitches I've found and I'll be airborn!
Click to expand...

I LOVE the paint scheme on the prop....:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top