Peat Bogs Make Bad Runways

[Snowbirdxx]

Before any airspeed for comparison is recorded or collected a static check should be done. Not the one where the tightness is verified, but the one to check the correctness of the value.

Tis is the procedure:
Line up on a long flat runway, set the altimeter to the next thousand, takeoff without flaps and do not climb above 10 ft, keep full power till the end of the runway, altitude should not have changed.
But airspeed should have gone to 125 mph or more.. The 10 ft above the runway are hardly readable.

Do not fly it into the ground!

If altitude is off by more than 30 ft a pinky ring is needed.

 

[Ak Kurt]

Still 5-6 its increase is pretty darn good!

 

[wbatz1]

While working on installing g35 gps antenna and garmin gtx 335 tspdr, I decided to go looking to see if pitot-static system was in compliance. I found a note in log books that I missed when I bought plane in 2014. A California avionics shop could not find source of leak and maintenance was “deferred”. I started at alternate static line and got a fail at 43secs. Reconnected that, disconnected forward line at water trap, and got a pass at 1:17 x3tests(so instruments okay). So that isolates leak to aft of the trap. Removed fairing from wing root. Upon inspection found a mar/nick in the static line, caused by a hose clamp on the pitot line. (Pics included). Repaired mar/nick with 3M aviation electrical tape, and covered hose clamp with electrical tape to prevent reoccurrence. Static tested again aft of static drain. Passed test 3x with 1:43,1:41,1:43 times. This wing root area is the place Thomas has spoken of previously, safety wires can also damage tubing.

 

[Snowbirdxx]

Most of the time the pcv tubing gets cut by safety wire. Seen damaged tubing under the black fairing behind the windshield as well. The tubing under the panel just connected to the T fittings without any clamps is anything but professional.

 

[belloypilot]

Before any airspeed for comparison is recorded or collected a static check should be done. Not the one where the tightness is verified, but the one to check the correctness of the value.

Tis is the procedure:
Line up on a long flat runway, set the altimeter to the next thousand, takeoff without flaps and do not climb above 10 ft, keep full power till the end of the runway, altitude should not have changed.
But airspeed should have gone to 125 mph or more.. The 10 ft above the runway are hardly readable.

Do not fly it into the ground!

If altitude is off by more than 30 ft a pinky ring is needed.

I finally got around to performing this test. 10-15’ off the runway with the ASI showing near top of the green arc the altimeter was reading 60’ lower than field elevation - so about 70-75’ lower than it should. No surprise as this sounds like a common problem. I seem to recall reading somewhere on this board that Husky’s equipped with a heated pitot don’t have this problem. Is that correct or am I imagining things again?

 

[Snowbirdxx]

That seems correct.
To compensate slide two o rings over the pitot tube. One behind and one in front of the static holes. To compensate 70 ft I ll try one of ring just in front.