Look for Vari-Prop at Sun'n'fun. Bolt on hydraulic system with blades custom
fitted
to your application. Lighter weight than Airmaster.
-----Original Message-----
From: KARL HEINDL <kheindl@msn.com>
Subject: RE: Europa-List: Propeller discussions
Paul,
Are yu sure about the 72"?. I am not near my Europa at the moment, but I
could have sworn that that should read 62".
I had investigated the Hoffmann (also German) propeller, because it is widey
used on certified aircraft with Rotax, i.e. Katana, Dimona and other
motorgliders. It is 2-blade, cs, and feathering.
It is unlikely to be interesting for the Europa because: it is hydraulic,
twice as heavy as the Airmaster setup, and twice as expensive as the
Airmaster.
As far as I know, Airmaster don't actually make propellers. They make the
AC200 control box and electronics etc. and fit it with the Warp Drive.
I am also planning to upgrade this year and my present choice is the new
Woodcomp SR3000 with twin-blade of 170cm (67"). Anything longer would not be
wise on the Europa, and definately not on the mono. Reason for the 2-blade
version is reduced drag whenever I am in glider mode (one of these days).
Karl
>From: "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister@qia.net>
>Reply-To: europa-list@matronics.com
>To: <europa-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: Europa-List: Propeller discussions
>Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 07:21:03 -0600
>
><paul.mcallister@qia.net>
>
>Jeff,
>
>I just looked at the manual and under Maximum diameter they have 72" / 183
>cm, but then under that they state the weight and in brackets "Data shown
>for 64" diameter and 10" spinner"
>
>So.... I don't really know. You would think that you get a reduction in
>diameter for increasing the number of blades for a given HP capacity.
>
>My interest in this whole topic is two fold. John Hurst once told me that
>the Whirlwind propeller was good for an additional 20 knots at 17,500' over
>the Airmaster. At first glance this doesn't make much sense, usually a
>multi bladed propeller is more efficient at altitude. John agreed but
>seemed to think that the Warp drive blades were just not very efficient.
>Given that no A:B comparisons were made as a controlled experiment, then
>its
>just an opinion.
>
>Most of my flying is long cross country trips, typically in the 500 ~ 800
>nm
>range. A propeller that would give me 20 more knots at altitude is
>seductive.
>
>My other interest in the whole topic is service, 6~8 week cycle times isn't
>very good. I suspect that from the US the issue same issues would exist
>for
>the European sourced products. So, am I about to spend +6k for another
>propeller that might go faster and can provide local service.... probably
>not, but I am just curious as to why the MT has never caught on in the
>Europa community.
>
>Cheers, Paul
>
>
|