Evita Race Progress

[PRB]

I'm proceeding along the assumption that JockHa and svenk are operating as "Team SAS." If this is incorrect, please let me know. If you are operating as a team, it is a little easier to manage if it's done on one thread. I did notice the duplicate legs. I took the latest one...

[svenks]

I'm proceeding along the assumption that JockHa and svenk are operating as "Team SAS." If this is incorrect, please let me know. If you are operating as a team, it is a little easier to manage if it's done on one thread. I did notice the duplicate legs. I took the latest one...

Hi Guys,

The story is: By the time I heard of the race, Jock had already signed up and of course I didn't want to just butt in and call us a team. So originally it was my intention to fly all the legs myself, but hoping to coordinate with Jock so we could fly online.

But as time is running and real-life matters keeps cropping up, I think it would be a better idea to run as a team - especially as Jock also is kind of busy at the moment. However, I haven't talked it over with him yet, so for now just keep on just tracking Jock. If need be, you can always put in my numbers since I haven't flown more than 1 leg yet...

I will be talking to Jock tomorrow (hopefully), and we'll get back to you soonest.

Thank you,
Sven

[svenks]

Hi guys

Had a talk with Jock last night, and we've decided to fly the rest of the race as a team. Hence, I will post under Jock's thread and discontinue my own.

This at least gives us a chance to complete the race.

If someone could rename the thread to read something with Team SAS, it would be great.

BRGDS
Sven

[PRB]

Thanks, Sven. Team SAS it is!

[PRB]

Update!

Congratulations to arrvoo and Rfields for completing the race course and joining the rest of the sizable crowd gathering in Argentina!

Congratulations to buzzbee as well, as soon as I get his missing duenna data for leg SCTI - SACO! :d

:ernae:

[PRB]

Update!

Congratulations to RedGreen, Gann’s Flying Circus, and Mchales Air Force, as they have completed the course and are now contributing to the law enforcement problem in Argentina!

For Buzzbee's next to last leg, I got the distance between the two airports from Super Flight Planner, and used the flight time, and fuel usage from the last leg, since they are very close to being the same length.

[PRB]

Update!

Congratulations, Vicious! Well done with the Avro! Good fuel milage that ship has...

[PRB]

Update.

Congrats to Willy and Team SAS! It's been a little confusing since the asteriod impact took out the out-house, but I think I have all the numbers correct.

[srgalahad]

Looks good Paul.

A couple more die-hards left and we can do a full post-mortem

Rob

[Willy]

Interesting results so far..... :d

[PRB]

Update.

Congratulations, teson1!
:ernae:

[RedGreen]

So......are the Perons ready to announce who won? National is getting anxious to have its DC-6 back...

[PRB]

The Winners Are:

North America:
Vicious (Vicious Air Adventures)

Europe:
Teson1 (Eastern Airlines)

Pacific:
Team McHale (McHale’s Airlines)

Congratulations to all who participated. It was a fun and interesting event! The winners are buying the beer at the Alvear!

[srgalahad]

Looks good Paul.



While the Committee used "Race Time" and divided it into three geographic areas, it's interesting to also look at the performance of the competitors using comparable measurements.

In a joint statement today, officials from Rolls Royce, Canadair and McHale's Airline released an expanded set of calculations.

"This data demonstrates the significant superiority of inline V-12 engines over the round, high-drag, 18+ cylinder radials (one war-surplus Boeing mini-whale excepted). Most telling is a Fuel/1000nm calculation that shows the Rolls Royce Merlin-powered aircraft to be almost twice as efficient as the corncob Boeings and significantly better than virtually all of the competitors. While post-war production is still hampered by the massive rebuilding effort in a fragile economy, it can be seen that Rolls Royce and it's partners can provide the emerging airlines with significant economic advantages in competitive industry. This powerplant, paired with modern, developed, pressurized airframes and improved navigation technology that is on the horizon will be able to make faster, cheaper air travel a part of the future."

"Of course, real-world airline planning is based on round-trip service. While the Pacific competitors had a preponderance of tailwinds during this demonstration flight, the McHale's Airline intensive testing program found that the return headwind could be significantly avoided at the expense of only slightly higher (approx 15%) Rolls Royce Merlin fuel consumptions by flying at FL180-210 westbound and avoiding the Jetstream effects."

It would be interesting to see what the end result would be after a flight "home".

Speaking of "home", are you going to stay in Tahiti forever????

[PRB]

Interesting that you should bring up the issue of Merlin engines on those Canadian C-54s vs. the radials used by the Yanks. Your man Don McVicar had an opinion on this very subject. He thought the Canadian decision to go with Merlins was a dumb idea for two reasons. 1) the in-lines were much noisier than the radials, and 2) they had a much shorter service life. They were great for war planes, where service life was basically no big deal, but for a civil airliner, which would operate the engines for longer periods of time and more often, the choice of the in-lines was a bad business decision.

[Willy]

Interesting and the Boeing 307 Stratoliner did better than I hoped. It had a faster overall time than some that I thought would beat it. And it was the fuel economy leader. If Boeing had resumed production after WWII, it'd probably would have given the DC-4 one heck of a run for the money.

[srgalahad]

Interesting that you should bring up the issue of Merlin engines on those Canadian C-54s vs. the radials used by the Yanks. Your man Don McVicar had an opinion on this very subject. He thought the Canadian decision to go with Merlins was a dumb idea for two reasons. 1) the in-lines were much noisier than the radials, and 2) they had a much shorter service life. They were great for war planes, where service life was basically no big deal, but for a civil airliner, which would operate the engines for longer periods of time and more often, the choice of the in-lines was a bad business decision.

Don had an opinion on most everything. To a degree he was right.

The inlines had a higher mtce cost in part because they lacked the abundance of cheap parts and had a numerical disadvantage in demobilized engine techs as well. It was easy to order up a jug for a R-2000 and slap it on (which could be done in the bush if required-- and often was) but the inlines required an engine change if there was a serious failure. One reason the Canadair project was spec'd with the Merlin was it's efficiencies while both Canada and Britain HAD the Merlin techs. On the downside, the inlines had the additional complexity of a liquid coolant system.

As far as longevity, the numbers are skewed somewhat as there were few transport a/c with inlines and the combat a/c certainly did get pushed to the limit regularly. Even so, the most fuel-efficient fighter of WWII with one of the lowest mtce-hour/flight hour was the Mustang.

That the NorthStar/Argonaut was operated successfully around the world well into the '60s (and often in 'remote' locations) does indicate that in airline service they were at least competitive, but couldn't compare overall because of the small production numbers.

The telling argument is that due to the source of most cheap, available a/c being US-made transports ( hundreds of DC-3's & DC-4's for example) it was difficult for ANY new production to gain a foothold. By then Douglas had a leg up on the next-generation. P&W and to a smaller degree, Wright had swamped the world with radials with a huge inventory of parts while people like Rolls were limited by post-war recovery.

It would be interesting to see what a level playing field would have brought in the way of performance, fuel efficiency, simplified cooling
and other improvements. As a side note on the noise issue, TCA developed the MacLeod crossover exhaust system for the Merlin which (at least for the passengers) reduced the noise significantly in much the same way that the collector-ring exhaust of the P&W's did - by moving most of the exhaust outboard. The short, direct stacks on the Merlins aimed right at the passenger cabin WERE brutal!

Willy, I suspected the 307 would do well on fuel numbers. Where it would be questionable in an airline environment would be the speed and load. Boeing tried the quantum leap to the Stratocruiser, but cost and time were the gotchas... the corncob WAS a gas-hog and of course, by the time it was 'civilianized' the jets were coming. It was too big a leap with too little time to prove itself while Douglas could enjoy huge production volumes with a maturing DC-4, 6, 7 production run.

Looking back at the table I see a potential comparison to the auto industry that we best discuss elsewhere

Ultimately, dang jets ruined a wonderful struggle

Some interesting data if you compare these two pages side-by-side:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_&_Whitney_R-2800
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Merlin

Rob

[teson1]

Today the bar is on Eastern. :ernae:

Thanks a lot to the good people at SOH who have worked out and organised this excellent event!

Good story, nice selection of planes to fly, plenty of challenges. Man, did I learn a lot...
Loved the rules that favor realistic power management! Very well thought out! Would love to see that in more events.
Makes all the racing part more of a head game, besides

Only thing, I fear I tweaked too much and ended up flying well outside realistic parameters in the end.
Guess what my cargo was - plenty of spare engines.

Now srg, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Makes my poor head spin... :isadizzy:
However, don't take my performance as being representative of the real aircraft.

[Vicious]

I agree with teson that the results don't reflect what the real world aircraft might have done. I doubt my Tudor could have flown at max power for 30+ hours with all the cooling doors shut without some engine problems. I also don't think it was rated to -4G pushovers or capable of 1000ft landings at high gross weights.

From my estimates I think the 377 could have beat my Tudor, and would have in real life, but the flight model on the Tudor was simpler/easier to manage so it was possible to get the most performance from it. During race prep I overstressed the 377 several times but never have done so in the Tudor, so I could get the maximum performance all the time without risk. Not realistic, but fun.

[Dangerousdave26]

Thanks Paul for being the Score Keeper you did a great job.

Have one on me in the Cantina and one from John and one from Rob ...

Anonther from Red Green and one from Willy and another from MM

and Probably everyone else who enjoyed the Race.

Which should leave you feeling like this tomorrow. :toilet:

And for eveyone else who had a hand in planning the event feel free to grab one of Pauls Beers