 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
AV8ORJWC
Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:34 pm Post subject: New Hartzell Available |
 |
|
And I thought fuel would have to be provided. Here is the attached file that Pascal referenced. It has been a year but then I keep every article and picture... what can I say. Randy's was running an ole style reconditioned 2 blade Hartzell, Ken S was implying that Vic's aircraft did not deliver the power represented by his engine builder, the specs were compared for N104ME at a higher altitude and greater flying weight.
Before Tim offered, I was about to through sponsorship money into a kitty. Each aircraft would have to be ballast loaded to the same CG and same T.O. weight. All would have to have the same fuel. They would all fly the same course. They would be timed. The fuel consumed, time enroute and settings would have do be Data Logged. As many guys who want to participate could. I would love it if all four flavors were represented at the same time.
You have to read the parochial propaganda bent in the enclosed article. Have fun. Hope Matt does not strip off the article.
John Cox
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of Tim Olson
Sent: Sat 3/7/2009 3:09 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: New Hartzell Available
I will fly off the various prop....all on the same day. All they have to do is GIVE me all of them for free and let me keep my favorite when I'm done....At zero cost.
All must be brand new.
Tim
On Mar 7, 2009, at 3:38 PM, Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)> wrote:
[quote] I agree completely with John. There is also, although maybe slight with the quality of the kit, a possibility of differences in the airframes and engines being tested. I know one -10 that has seen 184KTAS confirmed with groundspeed averaged runs. Others can't get over 176 or so max.
I think I would even take it a notch past John in that the only true comparison can be the same plane with different props bolted on. I believe herein lies the problem. Who wants to take the time to bolt a 3-blade prop onto their 2-blade plane just to give numbers to others, since their decision was already made (and vice versa, of course).
Ideally, two high-time -10'ers could fly side by side, comparing ground roll, climb rate, cruise speed (all at equal engine settings) and then swap props and do the same tests. This would give the pilots reporting an opportunity to see what their plane would do with another prop. A cross-country trip would be fantastic as well, swapping props for the return trip to compare total fuel burn for formation climbs and cruise, or comparing total trip time at the same cruising altitude.
This could also give a high-time pilot the chance to "feel" the difference. I know a problem with this is the dynamic balancing issue. If a prop is dynamically balanced for one plane and then is put on another, it may not "feel" as good as it could if it were also dynamically balanced for that specific plane.
It's time to get back to work, but I would personally love to see a comparison of these, but I wonder how many would actually change their mind. IMHO, I think the 2 blade is the best all-around prop for the -10 because of cost (Van's price is fantastic on this prop), the fact that it is aluminum (In my bush flying experience composite props don't last very long, so call me biased), ease of cowling installation and removal and top speed at given settings (according to most common wisdom). The -10, IMHO, already takes off and climbs so well that I have a hard time believing, except in extreme cases, that higher take-off and climb performance would be necessary. I would take a -10 over a 180HP STOL 172 or a STOL 206 for takeoff and climb off grass any day, although when the grass gets rough, it's hard to beat the Cessna gear. I have yet to see a Cirrus or Columbia demonstrate any kind of performance on takeoff that is even in the same class as the -10. That said, if the airstrip was 300 yards long or at 9,500msl, I might thing about a 3-blade regardless of cruise performance (extreme cases as mentioned above). I have taken off in a -10 at 9,500msl at gross weight (uphill, not less) and was quite happy with the performance, but I did probably use as much runway as a Cirrus typically does at my home field at 65msl.
OK, now it's really time to get back to work.
do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
[url=mailto:jesse(at)saintaviation.com]jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)[/url]
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
On Mar 7, 2009, at 2:44 PM, John Cox wrote:
[quote] Call me stubborn, but I did not accept the referenced test as valid then or now. Will still lust after a long x-cntry with similar engined RV-10s running a Hartzell 2 blade aluminum egg beater, a Hartzell 3 blade Composite, an MT and an Aerocomp on an extended trip. Time to climb, LOP ops, Cruise fuel flow and comfort could all be factored with teams switching ponies on various legs to validate parochial bias.
We have the technology, I will await a valid comparison. The query comes up because Jim has not acknowledge the results of a test with his MT and I know of no unbiased test yet with all four flavors.
Hard Headed in Aurora
From: [url=mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com]owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com)[/url] [[url=mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com]mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com)[/url]] On Behalf Of pascal
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 9:57 AM
To: [url=mailto:rv10-list(at)matronics.com]rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)[/url]
Subject: Re: New Hartzell Available
This has come up before. Vic did a test next to the Van's plane (attached) and I took away that the higher HP 3 blade still was slower than the Van's 2 blade, Rob did a preliminary, if I recall, and it too was slower than a 2 blade, Hartzell has told me outright that the 2 blade is faster than the composite three blade.
Three is more "sexy" but when it comes to performance at this point the 2 blade is the best value for the dollar.
Pascal
From: John Cox (johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com)
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 9:32 AM
To: [url=mailto:rv10-list(at)matronics.com]rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)[/url]
Subject: RE: New Hartzell Available
Jim, you could do a big favor to the experimental market by lobbying Gert to allow custom blade paint on the MTs. Nothing against White Blades, Black Blades, Grey blades… but boy do the American Propeller paint jobs get my juices flowing. Some RV-10s just look fast standing on the ramp next to a G-IV.
I am sure Aerocomp blades would sell as many in stock "restricted" bland paint colors but those finished blades are prettier in my eyes and impact marketing= Sales. Enough so that money must be budgeted a little tighter than I had planned originally.
And isn't it tragic that not one "Head to Head" has been done in all this time. 190 finished, flying RV-10s, nearly 1,000 kits sold and Not Hartzell, Nor MT nor Aerocomp will take the gauntlet. Rob, I understand your timeline priorities on great new AFS products have distracted you, but many are leaning into the prevailing winds to hear more on Field Tests of the Hartzell ASC-II.
John
From: [url=mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com]owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com)[/url] [[url=mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com]mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com)[/url]] On Behalf Of [url=mailto:lessdragprod(at)aol.com]lessdragprod(at)aol.com (lessdragprod(at)aol.com)[/url]
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 9:08 AM
To: [url=mailto:rv10-list(at)matronics.com]rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)[/url]
Subject: Re: New Hartzell Available
Just a point of clearification here. Michael's 3 blade MT propeller was a new propeller available for comparison flight testing on a flying RV-10 with a 2 blade hartzell. With no takers in over a year, I sold the propeller to Michael.
I have new RV-10 3 blade MT propellers available for $9,890 delivered assembled to your closest international airport. 13" or 14" spinner included.
Standard colors are Red, White, Grey, Black and Yellow for the blades, blade tips and spinner.
Grey with White tips is recommended for IFR aircraft.
Black with Yellow tips was the old CAA required blade colors.
As a special offer, White blades with Red, White and Blue tips is available.
A Hi-Glo spinner (looks like polished aluminum) is available for an extra $450.
Sorry if this offens the SPAM sensitive. Just real prices.
Please contact me off line, or directly at the phone numbers below, if you desire additional information.
Jim Ayers
[url=mailto:jim(at)lessdrag.com]jim(at)lessdrag.com (jim(at)lessdrag.com)[/url]
Less Drag products, Inc - Located in California (805) 795-5377
Custom Aircraft Propeller - Located in Florida (321) 441-3544
--
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
| Description: |
|
Download |
| Filename: |
speed%20test.pdf |
| Filesize: |
1.28 MB |
| Downloaded: |
1506 Time(s) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pascal(at)rv10builder.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:22 pm Post subject: New Hartzell Available |
|
|
Thanks John, I thought I sent the complete article..
I think a meeting is needed with all flavors, Tim, Rob, Deems and a 3 blade MT contender all meet up at local airport and do a systematic test.
From: John Cox (johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com)
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 4:25 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)
Subject: RE: New Hartzell Available
And I thought fuel would have to be provided. Here is the attached file that Pascal referenced. It has been a year but then I keep every article and picture... what can I say. Randy's was running an ole style reconditioned 2 blade Hartzell, Ken S was implying that Vic's aircraft did not deliver the power represented by his engine builder, the specs were compared for N104ME at a higher altitude and greater flying weight.
Before Tim offered, I was about to through sponsorship money into a kitty. Each aircraft would have to be ballast loaded to the same CG and same T.O. weight. All would have to have the same fuel. They would all fly the same course. They would be timed. The fuel consumed, time enroute and settings would have do be Data Logged. As many guys who want to participate could. I would love it if all four flavors were represented at the same time.
You have to read the parochial propaganda bent in the enclosed article. Have fun. Hope Matt does not strip off the article.
John Cox
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com on behalf of Tim Olson
Sent: Sat 3/7/2009 3:09 PM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: New Hartzell Available
I will fly off the various prop....all on the same day. All they have to do is GIVE me all of them for free and let me keep my favorite when I'm done....At zero cost.
All must be brand new.
Tim
On Mar 7, 2009, at 3:38 PM, Jesse Saint <jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)> wrote:
[quote] I agree completely with John. There is also, although maybe slight with the quality of the kit, a possibility of differences in the airframes and engines being tested. I know one -10 that has seen 184KTAS confirmed with groundspeed averaged runs. Others can't get over 176 or so max.
I think I would even take it a notch past John in that the only true comparison can be the same plane with different props bolted on. I believe herein lies the problem. Who wants to take the time to bolt a 3-blade prop onto their 2-blade plane just to give numbers to others, since their decision was already made (and vice versa, of course).
Ideally, two high-time -10'ers could fly side by side, comparing ground roll, climb rate, cruise speed (all at equal engine settings) and then swap props and do the same tests. This would give the pilots reporting an opportunity to see what their plane would do with another prop. A cross-country trip would be fantastic as well, swapping props for the return trip to compare total fuel burn for formation climbs and cruise, or comparing total trip time at the same cruising altitude.
This could also give a high-time pilot the chance to "feel" the difference. I know a problem with this is the dynamic balancing issue. If a prop is dynamically balanced for one plane and then is put on another, it may not "feel" as good as it could if it were also dynamically balanced for that specific plane.
It's time to get back to work, but I would personally love to see a comparison of these, but I wonder how many would actually change their mind. IMHO, I think the 2 blade is the best all-around prop for the -10 because of cost (Van's price is fantastic on this prop), the fact that it is aluminum (In my bush flying experience composite props don't last very long, so call me biased), ease of cowling installation and removal and top speed at given settings (according to most common wisdom). The -10, IMHO, already takes off and climbs so well that I have a hard time believing, except in extreme cases, that higher take-off and climb performance would be necessary. I would take a -10 over a 180HP STOL 172 or a STOL 206 for takeoff and climb off grass any day, although when the grass gets rough, it's hard to beat the Cessna gear. I have yet to see a Cirrus or Columbia demonstrate any kind of performance on takeoff that is even in the same class as the -10. That said, if the airstrip was 300 yards long or at 9,500msl, I might thing about a 3-blade regardless of cruise performance (extreme cases as mentioned above). I have taken off in a -10 at 9,500msl at gross weight (uphill, not less) and was quite happy with the performance, but I did probably use as much runway as a Cirrus typically does at my home field at 65msl.
OK, now it's really time to get back to work.
do not archive
Jesse Saint
Saint Aviation, Inc.
[url=mailto:jesse(at)saintaviation.com]jesse(at)saintaviation.com (jesse(at)saintaviation.com)[/url]
Cell: 352-427-0285
Fax: 815-377-3694
On Mar 7, 2009, at 2:44 PM, John Cox wrote:
| Quote: | Call me stubborn, but I did not accept the referenced test as valid then or now. Will still lust after a long x-cntry with similar engined RV-10s running a Hartzell 2 blade aluminum egg beater, a Hartzell 3 blade Composite, an MT and an Aerocomp on an extended trip. Time to climb, LOP ops, Cruise fuel flow and comfort could all be factored with teams switching ponies on various legs to validate parochial bias.
We have the technology, I will await a valid comparison. The query comes up because Jim has not acknowledge the results of a test with his MT and I know of no unbiased test yet with all four flavors.
Hard Headed in Aurora
From: [url=mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com]owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com)[/url] [[url=mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com]mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com)[/url]] On Behalf Of pascal
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 9:57 AM
To: [url=mailto:rv10-list(at)matronics.com]rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)[/url]
Subject: Re: New Hartzell Available
This has come up before. Vic did a test next to the Van's plane (attached) and I took away that the higher HP 3 blade still was slower than the Van's 2 blade, Rob did a preliminary, if I recall, and it too was slower than a 2 blade, Hartzell has told me outright that the 2 blade is faster than the composite three blade.
Three is more "sexy" but when it comes to performance at this point the 2 blade is the best value for the dollar.
Pascal
From: John Cox (johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com)
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 9:32 AM
To: [url=mailto:rv10-list(at)matronics.com]rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)[/url]
Subject: RE: New Hartzell Available
Jim, you could do a big favor to the experimental market by lobbying Gert to allow custom blade paint on the MTs. Nothing against White Blades, Black Blades, Grey blades… but boy do the American Propeller paint jobs get my juices flowing. Some RV-10s just look fast standing on the ramp next to a G-IV.
I am sure Aerocomp blades would sell as many in stock "restricted" bland paint colors but those finished blades are prettier in my eyes and impact marketing= Sales. Enough so that money must be budgeted a little tighter than I had planned originally.
And isn't it tragic that not one "Head to Head" has been done in all this time. 190 finished, flying RV-10s, nearly 1,000 kits sold and Not Hartzell, Nor MT nor Aerocomp will take the gauntlet. Rob, I understand your timeline priorities on great new AFS products have distracted you, but many are leaning into the prevailing winds to hear more on Field Tests of the Hartzell ASC-II.
John
From: [url=mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com]owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com)[/url] [[url=mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com]mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com (owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com)[/url]] On Behalf Of [url=mailto:lessdragprod(at)aol.com]lessdragprod(at)aol.com (lessdragprod(at)aol.com)[/url]
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 9:08 AM
To: [url=mailto:rv10-list(at)matronics.com]rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)[/url]
Subject: Re: New Hartzell Available
Just a point of clearification here. Michael's 3 blade MT propeller was a new propeller available for comparison flight testing on a flying RV-10 with a 2 blade hartzell. With no takers in over a year, I sold the propeller to Michael.
I have new RV-10 3 blade MT propellers available for $9,890 delivered assembled to your closest international airport. 13" or 14" spinner included.
Standard colors are Red, White, Grey, Black and Yellow for the blades, blade tips and spinner.
Grey with White tips is recommended for IFR aircraft.
Black with Yellow tips was the old CAA required blade colors.
As a special offer, White blades with Red, White and Blue tips is available.
A Hi-Glo spinner (looks like polished aluminum) is available for an extra $450.
Sorry if this offens the SPAM sensitive. Just real prices.
Please contact me off line, or directly at the phone numbers below, if you desire additional information.
Jim Ayers
[url=mailto:jim(at)lessdrag.com]jim(at)lessdrag.com (jim(at)lessdrag.com)[/url]
Less Drag products, Inc - Located in California (805) 795-5377
Custom Aircraft Propeller - Located in Florida (321) 441-3544
-----Original Message-----
From: RV Builder (Michael Sausen) <[url=mailto:rvbuilder(at)sausen.net]rvbuilder(at)sausen.net (rvbuilder(at)sausen.net)[/url]>
To: [url=mailto:rv10-list(at)matronics.com]rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)[/url] <[url=mailto:rv10-list(at)matronics.com]rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)[/url]>
Sent: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 8:14 am
Subject: RE: New Hartzell Available
I have to disagree, my new 3 blade MT was under 9k with 14” spinner, assembly, and shipping. You don’t pay extra for a 14” spinner with MT. I did get a bit of a price break because it was one that someone had ordered and then backed out on but this was only a couple months ago.
Michael
��~��,
g��
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
partner14
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Posts: 540
Location: Granbury Texas
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:01 am Post subject: New Hartzell Available |
|
|
Although not flying yet.... here's what I can tell you all about the MT 3 blade..... For out first start we put a camcorder on a tripod and filmed the entire sequence. One thing I noted... novice here... I was told to expect quite a bit of rocking motion on start and shut down.... because the camera was mounted on the tripod, it was really easy to study any movements made by the plane or the engine during start, running and shut down. To my surprise, there was almost NO movement at all during any of these 3 phases. I reviewed the recording multiple times, especially the shutdown, and was amazed how smooth it was.   Yesterday I watched an RV7 run up the engine in prep for his first flight the following day. On shut down, I couldn't believe how violent the rocking motion was. I know this is only a 4 cyl engine, but certainly there was a huge difference. I simply purchased the 3 blade because I was pretty sure the overall vibration would
be curtailed quite a bit.... very smooth.
My 2 cents worth.
Don McDonald
Â
Â
Today I watched a first flight of an RV7
--- On Sat, 3/7/09, pascal <pascal(at)rv10builder.net> wrote:
From: pascal <pascal(at)rv10builder.net>
Subject: Re: New Hartzell Available
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Saturday, March 7, 2009, 9:57 AM
This has come up before. Vic did a test next to the Van's plane (attached) and I took away that the higher HP 3 blade still was slower than the Van's 2 blade, Rob did a preliminary, if I recall, and it too was slower than a 2 blade, Hartzell has told me outright that the 2 blade is faster than the composite three blade.
Three is more "sexy" but when it comes to performance at this point the 2 blade is the best value for the dollar.
Pascal
From: John Cox
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 9:32 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: New Hartzell Available
Jim, you could do a big favor to the experimental market by lobbying Gert to allow custom blade paint on the MTs. Nothing against White Blades, Black Blades, Grey blades… but boy do the American Propeller paint jobs get my juices flowing. Some RV-10s just look fast standing on the ramp next to a G-IV.
Â
I am sure Aerocomp blades would sell as many in stock "restricted" bland paint colors but those finished blades are prettier in my eyes and impact marketing= Sales. Enough so that money must be budgeted a little tighter than I had planned originally.
Â
And isn't it tragic that not one "Head to Head" has been done in all this time. 190 finished, flying RV-10s, nearly 1,000 kits sold and Not Hartzell, Nor MT nor Aerocomp will take the gauntlet. Rob, I understand your timeline priorities on great new AFS products have distracted you, but many are leaning into the prevailing winds to hear more on Field Tests of the Hartzell ASC-II.
Â
John
Â
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lessdragprod(at)aol.com
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 9:08 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: New Hartzell Available
Â
Just a point of clearification here. Michael's 3 blade MT propeller was a new propeller available for comparison flight testing on a flying RV-10 with a 2 blade hartzell. With no takers in over a year, I sold the propeller to Michael.
I have new RV-10 3 blade MT propellers available for $9,890 delivered assembled to your closest international airport. 13" or 14" spinner included.
Standard colors are Red, White, Grey, Black and Yellow for the blades, blade tips and spinner.
Grey with White tips is recommended for IFR aircraft.
Black with Yellow tips was the old CAA required blade colors.
As a special offer, White blades with Red, White and Blue tips is available
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Don A. McDonald
40636 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nukeflyboy
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 162
Location: Granbury, TX
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 4:38 am Post subject: Re: New Hartzell Available |
|
|
I am really surprised at the debate over whether a 2 or 3 blade is more efficient. Unless there is some defect in the design a 2 blade will always win. In fact if you could make a one blade prop it would beat the 2 blade, though keeping vibration in check would be a problem. It's because each blade can't get completely out of the way of the turbulence of the preceding blade. Composite vs. Al blades seems to be neutral question. While many claim some magical efficiency with composites I think experience has show that to be pure marketing.
Three blades win out on ground clearance and tend to run smoother. Then there is the "look". I relate the debate to the tip up vs. slider canopy decision for the RV-6/7. Go with whatever floats your boat.
Personally I'm sticking with the 2 blade. With the 3 blade composite at twice the price and slower it is a no brainer for me.
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Dave Moore
RV-6 built and sold
RV-10 built and flying |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
partner14
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Posts: 540
Location: Granbury Texas
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 9:03 am Post subject: New Hartzell Available |
|
|
One thing I forgot to mention.... I was playing John Kerry over this issue, and what changed my mind was the comments from Greg Nelson. He retired a year ago from the Air Force, where he flew U2's, he now test flies them for Lockeed down in Palmdale. This being said to let everyone know that he pretty much knows what he's talking about. He flies a Rocket, with almost exactly the same motor I have (both from Performance Engines). He changed from a Hartzell 2 blade to a 3 blade MT. BTW he has competed in several of the Reno races. Although it's a different plane, it was the SAME plane with 2 of the props in question. He observed a small decrease in top airspeed, something in the 2-4 knot range, with takeoff and climb very comparable.
In my previous life I used to race.... stuff on the ground,,,, and anything that could/would reduce vibration was a good thing. If it's smoother for the occupant, it's also smoother for the motor, the avionics, and the entire rest of the airplane.
Ok, that's probably a total of my 5 cents worth.
Don McDonald
#40636
Awaiting my ticket and the FAA ticket
--- On Sun, 3/8/09, nukeflyboy <flymoore(at)charter.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
From: nukeflyboy <flymoore(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: New Hartzell Available
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Date: Sunday, March 8, 2009, 5:38 AM
--> RV10-List message posted by: "nukeflyboy" <flymoore(at)charter.net (flymoore(at)charter.net)>
I am really surprised at the debate over whether a 2 or 3 blade is more efficient. Unless there is some defect in the design a 2 blade will always win. In fact if you could make a one blade prop it would beat the 2 blade, though keeping vibration in check would be a problem. It's because each blade can't get completely out of the way of the turbulence of the preceding blade. Composite vs. Al blades seems to be neutral question. While many claim some magical efficiency with composites I think experience has show that to be pure marketing.
Three blades win out on ground clearance and tend to run smoother. Then there is the "look". I relate the debate to the tip up vs. slider canopy decision for the RV-6/7. Go with whatever floats your boat.
Personally I'm sticking with the 2 blade. With the 3 blade composite at twice the price and slower it is a no brainer for me.
--------
Dave Moore
RV-6 flying
RV-10 QB - cabin top/fiberglass hell
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=233681#233681
--> httphttp://forums.matronics.com/" target=_blank>http://forums.matronics.com
|
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Don A. McDonald
40636 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lessdragprod(at)aol.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 9:55 am Post subject: New Hartzell Available |
|
|
I recently learned a little more about vibration. There is a 1/2 P vibration which is 1/2 of the engine RPM. This is a vibration that can not be removed by balancing. Neither static nor dynamic balancing affect the 1/2 P vibration. It is a characteristic of the engine and propeller and probably other factors.
At 2400 RPM, the direct frequency (1 P) is 40 hz. (2400RPM/60seconds per minute=40Hz)
The 1/2 P would be 20 Hz.
How would you determine the 1/2 P vibration in your aircraft? The next time you're flying along, rest your head against the airframe.
What is the significancy of the 1/2 P vibration? It is the environment that your instrument panel is expected to exist in.
In dynamic balancing the engine and propeller, the higher frequencies are balanced out to less than 0.04 IPS.
The only numbers I have for 1/2 P are from cessna 182 STC flight test data.
With a Hartzell propeller, the 1/2 P vibration level was 1.2 IPS.
With a McCullogh propeller, the 1/2 P vibration level was 0.8 IPS.
With the STC MT Propeller, the 1/2 P vibration level was 0.2 IPS.
It would be interesting if someone could ride in various RV-10's, and get a "feel"  for this with both 2 blade and 3 blade propellers. Preferably in two, or more, with each propeller.
Jim Ayers
HR2 - configured for 15,000' to 17,500' cruise altitude. 4 blade MT Propeller.
Lycoming peak torque occurs at 2200 RPM.
--
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AV8ORJWC
Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:23 am Post subject: New Hartzell Available |
|
|
Engine mounts, Plexiglas windows, welds in 4130 aircraft steps, stress risers within aluminum sheet stock and driven rivets all talk back from vibration over time. Some talk louder than others. "Metal has Memory". Dynamic balancing is appreciated by those who go there. Reducing vibration is a Good Thing. We could go into a whole dissertation on "Smoking Rivet", their cause, there appearance and the cost of remediation once found. Older pilots tend to lose hearing and get lulled into a nap state on the subject and as a result of the harmonic. Young pilots tend to turn up the IPod to override the background chatter. Rich pilots settle for the 3 blade composite Hartzell and go along for the ride behind the younger 2 blade set.
What HP range is needed to effectively drive a 4 blade MT?
I have ridden in several and found all variants to be worthy of the pleasure. Thanks' guys. Will wait for Deems (AeroComp) offer with avgas money in hand.
John Cox
do not archive
From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lessdragprod(at)aol.com
Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 10:54 AM
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: Re: New Hartzell Available
I recently learned a little more about vibration. There is a 1/2 P vibration which is 1/2 of the engine RPM. This is a vibration that can not be removed by balancing. Neither static nor dynamic balancing affect the 1/2 P vibration. It is a characteristic of the engine and propeller and probably other factors.
At 2400 RPM, the direct frequency (1 P) is 40 hz. (2400RPM/60seconds per minute=40Hz)
The 1/2 P would be 20 Hz.
How would you determine the 1/2 P vibration in your aircraft? The next time you're flying along, rest your head against the airframe.
What is the significancy of the 1/2 P vibration? It is the environment that your instrument panel is expected to exist in.
In dynamic balancing the engine and propeller, the higher frequencies are balanced out to less than 0.04 IPS.
The only numbers I have for 1/2 P are from cessna 182 STC flight test data.
With a Hartzell propeller, the 1/2 P vibration level was 1.2 IPS.
With a McCullogh propeller, the 1/2 P vibration level was 0.8 IPS.
With the STC MT Propeller, the 1/2 P vibration level was 0.2 IPS.
It would be interesting if someone could ride in various RV-10's, and get a "feel" for this with both 2 blade and 3 blade propellers. Preferably in two, or more, with each propeller.
Jim Ayers
HR2 - configured for 15,000' to 17,500' cruise altitude. 4 blade MT Propeller.
Lycoming peak torque occurs at 2200 RPM.
[quote] [b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deej(at)deej.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2009 7:33 am Post subject: New Hartzell Available |
|
|
nukeflyboy wrote:
| Quote: |
I am really surprised at the debate over whether a 2 or 3 blade is more efficient. Unless there is some defect in the design a 2 blade will always win.
|
There is an overview of this on the Hartzell FAQ page
<http://www.hartzellprop.com/engineering/sitelink_engine_faqs.htm>
More technical info here
<http://www.epi-eng.com/propeller_technology/selecting_a_propeller.htm>
| Quote: | It's because each blade can't get completely out of the way of the turbulence of the preceding blade.
|
I can see where that might be the case if the airplane were sitting
still. If it is moving through the air, however, isn't each blade of
the prop traversing an arc through the air in a shape similar to that of
a corkscrew? If this is the case, I'm not sure the blades would be
hitting turbulence from the other blades, but I'm not positive.
There is some idle chatter about this at
<http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=917956> with lots of
shared opinions...
fyi
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ KR-2 Builder N770DJ
http://deej.net/sportsman/ http://deej.net/kr-2/
"Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an
airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
