We flew over 100 hours with a Whirlwind 2-blade prop which looked much 'heftier'
than the Warp Drive/Airmaster props. We later-on converted over to the
Airmaster
prop with Warp Drive blades. We were able to measure no difference in climb
or cruise performance, but did see an increase in braking effect with the
throttle closed, with the Warp Drive producing greater drag.
Just a random comment, for what it is worth.
Terry Seaver
A135/N135TD
Mono-wheel XS with 912S
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Peter Rees
Sent: Fri 2/3/2006 12:29 PM
Subject: Europa-List: Which Prop
I know that this may descend into the mono vs tri-gear, 912s vs 914
arguements but I'll ask the question anyway:
G-MFHI is fitted with a 912 fitted with a coursly set (18 degrees)
warpdrive - This returns a respectable 118-120kts and a rate of climb that
doesn't cause concern over the trees at Rochester.
The course setting of the prop limits the engine RPM to about 5100 so we
can't legally use the weight upgrade.
If we were to fit a VP/CS prop, we would see the requsite increase in RPM
and could therefore use the 1370 limit.
My question is - would a change to (what looks like) a prop with a more
spohisticated blade design such as the Kremen give me any advantage in the
cruise? If so, does anyone have any comments (positive or negative) which
prop (Rospellor, Kremen etc) may be more suitable to fitting to a Classic
912 - which is about to have the engine removed for sprag clutch replacement
:o(
Peter
|