On Jan 10, 2012, at 10:46 AM, graeme bird wrote:
>
> oh dear, searching back through the historical records I see I might
> have kicked a hornets nest. Just tell me about the benefits of the
> CS prop then rather than the comparison.
While I generally keep my distance from hornets' nests, as I've been
in prop selection mode, I will pass on the notion that some FP prop
manufacturers tout their products ability to adjust pitch (to a
significant degree) in accordance w/ load and forward airspeed...i.e.,
their props take a thinner bite in slow speed/high power situations,
and a thicker bite at cruise speed and cruise power settings. I write
"to a significant degree", but do not intend to suggest that such a FP
prop would provide CS performance.
My recent inquiry about who owns N108EA stems from my seeing it on
the Prince prop website gallery.
Check out:
http://princeaircraft.com/default.aspx and
http://www.neuform-propellers.com/index.php?f=1&lang=en&site=Propeller/Contact%20us
My interest in a ground adjustable FP prop stems from cost
considerations, risk of prop strike during initial monowheel ops, and
personal lack of experience flying behind a CS prop (thus affecting
cockpit workload during initial flight tests).
Fred
A194
|