Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:07 AM - Re: Re: Outrigger Pivot Bearing (Richard Churchill-Coleman)
2. 12:56 AM - Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? (John Wighton)
3. 01:20 AM - Re: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? (Peter Jeffers)
4. 01:36 AM - Re: Outrigger Pivot Bearing (flyingphil2)
5. 01:45 AM - Re: rudder springs (G-IANI)
6. 03:07 AM - Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? (Richard Collings)
7. 03:07 AM - Re: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? (David Joyce)
8. 03:39 AM - Re: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? (David Joyce)
9. 03:39 AM - =?ISO-8859-1?Q?RE=3A_Europa-List=3A_Re=3A_VP_prop=2C_?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?good_idea=3F_which_one=3F? (Carl Pattinson)
10. 04:35 AM - Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? (John Wighton)
11. 05:50 AM - Re: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? (David Joyce)
12. 05:57 AM - Re: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? (Max Cointe)
13. 07:03 AM - Re: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? (Paul McAllister)
14. 08:51 AM - Re: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? (Brian Davies)
15. 09:41 AM - Re: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? (Paul McAllister)
16. 11:04 AM - Re: rudder springs (Paul & Vanessa Munford)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Outrigger Pivot Bearing |
Graeme
If it should turn out that Chronos have the material but only in expensive
minimum quantities then I will be carrying out the Mod at some point and
would be happy to share costs.
Thanks
Richard
XS Mono/912ULS.....becoming a slightly more organised pile of parts....
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of graeme bird
Sent: 10 January 2012 19:47
Subject: Europa-List: Re: Outrigger Pivot Bearing
I could check out Chronos in dunstable, beds, uk again with that spec, it
should be right up thier street.
--------
Graeme Bird
G-UMPY
Mono Classic/XS FWFD 912ULS/Warp drive FP Just Test Flying to obtain permit
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? |
I would like David to validate his last comment - field length dependent upon prop
pitch when stopped.
When the prop is turning: The fine pitch gives lower residual thrust, hence field
length is potentially decreased. Feathering is not an option when engine
is working.
When the prop is stopped: There is a reduction in drag when the prop pitch is set
feathered but this should not alter the field length used for landing? Arguably
there is slightly lower drag when feathered, but this is negligible to the
total drag of the a/c in landing config.
Sorry to highjack the thread but this may be important for us with feathering props
if in a forced landing situation - tinkering with the feathering switch may
not be the most efficient use of our time at that phase of the flight!
I have the Airmaster AP332 with AP200 controller setup and recommend it.
--------
John Wighton
Europa XS trigear G-IPOD
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=363021#363021
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? |
HI Graham,
What I had meant to infer was that the fixed pitch props work ideally for
cruise OR take off, depending on how you set them. They are a compromise
every where else.
Sorry for the confusion. It must have been the wine??
Pete
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of graeme bird
Sent: 10 January 2012 20:05
Subject: Europa-List: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one?
Thanks Pete, yes I know its 5800 for a brief period only (5min) - but thats
long enough to take a speed reading.
Why did you say TO performance OR cruise, surely you improve both by setting
fine for take off and course for cruise. What speed would you expect in the
cruise?
Regards
--------
Graeme Bird
G-UMPY
Mono Classic/XS FWFD 912ULS/Warp drive FP
Just Test Flying to obtain permit
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=362968#362968
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Outrigger Pivot Bearing |
Roddy / Graeme,
I did get some tube for this mod but it was slightly wrong when it arrived although
it was fine after being turned down on a lathe.
Er, I'm not sure what I did with the rest (I had to buy 1 metre) but I'll have
a look. I may have donated it to my place of work so I'll have a fish around
there.
Phil
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=363024#363024
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Paul
I understand the problem. If the pedals are mounted in the position
specified in the CBM this should not occur. There should be just sufficient
length to the STBD foot well for the spring mount to give adequate tension.
I am surprised that you are looking for as much as 3inch of extension. Have
you any idea why this has happened?
If you have mounted the pedals further forward (as I did with LAA Mod
10665) then you may need to mount the forward end of the STBD spring forward
of the foot well by about 1inch. I used a small piece of AL angle bolted
(with two bolts) to the foot well. This was not specifically covered in the
Mod application but my inspector was happy with it.
Ian Rickard G-IANI XS Trigear, 300hours
Europa Club Mods Specialist
e-mail g-iani@ntlworld.com
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? |
Hi Graeme
I think you have by now got the technical reasons for VP props over fixed, I
have fitted a Woodcomp SR3000 in preference to other types because its made
in the EU, good service back up is provided by the agent in Leicester and at
the agents suggestion I am controlling it with a Smart Avionics controller
which is UK made. I have also fitted a manifold pressure sensor so manifold
pressure is displayed on the same unit negating the need for a separate
gauge.
I have the done the grand total of 50min test running so far so can't speak
on durability etc but no complaints so far.
Regards Richard
G-CGZV
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff B" <topglock@cox.net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: VP prop, good idea? which one?
>
> Graeme,
>
> I bought an Air Master, complete with CS controller, right off and haven't
> looked back. Great performance on both ends and in the middle, too.
>
> Jeff - Baby Blue
>
> On 1/10/2012 11:44 AM, graeme bird wrote:
>> --> Europa-List message posted by: "graeme bird"<graeme@gdbmk.co.uk>
>>
>> So, in the shake down flight we were getting 140kts indicated at 5700 @
>> 2000ft on a 912ULS but the ASI is reading a bit high. I presume a VP prop
>> would give a better take off and climb, quieter, maybe faster cruise
>> particularly in thinner air. Am I right and which to go for?
>> Woodcomp is significantly cheaper and I am told the wood is more
>> absorbent of vibrations and less stiff.
>> Is the CS controller worth having or is manual variable just as good?
>> Is it worth being able to feather it?
>>
>> I intend to fly on my FP warp drive initially but it would suit me to buy
>> the next prop now if thats the sensible thing to do.
>>
>> Advice appreciated.
>>
>> See you all at the dinner.
>>
>> --------
>> Graeme Bird
>> G-UMPY
>> Mono Classic/XS FWFD 912ULS/Warp drive FP
>> Just Test Flying to obtain permit
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=362946#362946
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? |
John, I can reply in two ways. Firstly in practical terms if you haven't tried
it you should. There is a really noticeable difference in how quickly you slow
down with the engine idling and the prop either in it's normal fine mode or fully
coarse.
Alternatively looking at things from a theoretical viewpoint, the total
drag for my DG300 glider at optimum glide angle(1:42) is around15 to 20lbs, (dividing
AUW by 42) at around 60kts. For my mono at it's best glide angle of 1:12
at 60 kts it is around 80 to 100 lbs. Now if you stick your hand out of your
car window going down the road at 60 kts/70mph and make it 'fully fine' the
force on your hand is something more than 10lbs. Imagine your hand enlarged to
the dimensions of three prop blades and you have accounted for much of the difference
in drag of my glider and my Europa!
Having the engine idling doesn't make too much odds. At 1600 rpm a typical
fine pitch tip angle of 20 degrees is equivalent to 9 kts. air flow. In
fact it is worse than that if you have warp drive blades or indeed most other
prop blades seen on Europas, which have low blade twist, which means that the
central and inner portions of the blades are producing significantly lower air
flow rates.
So my thesis is that an idling or stationary prop is responsible for
a high proportion of drag (admittedly somewhat lower if you have all those extra
wheels!!), and trying to slow down with the prop feathered is rather like trying
to land a glider without air brake - you can float in ground effect down
a long field until stopped by the far hedge!
Hope that all makes sense! Happy landings, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
Sent from my iPad
On 11 Jan 2012, at 08:53, "John Wighton" <john@wighton.net> wrote:
>
> I would like David to validate his last comment - field length dependent upon
prop pitch when stopped.
>
> When the prop is turning: The fine pitch gives lower residual thrust, hence
field length is potentially decreased. Feathering is not an option when engine
is working.
>
> When the prop is stopped: There is a reduction in drag when the prop pitch is
set feathered but this should not alter the field length used for landing? Arguably
there is slightly lower drag when feathered, but this is negligible to
the total drag of the a/c in landing config.
>
> Sorry to highjack the thread but this may be important for us with feathering
props if in a forced landing situation - tinkering with the feathering switch
may not be the most efficient use of our time at that phase of the flight!
>
> I have the Airmaster AP332 with AP200 controller setup and recommend it.
>
> --------
> John Wighton
> Europa XS trigear G-IPOD
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=363021#363021
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? |
Having just been looking back through this rather long thread I am tempted to add
a PS in relation to Fred Klein's comment about CS props and work load. Once
you have your head round how a CS prop works, I would argue that they actually
decrease the workload, rather than the reverse. My (Mark Burton smart Avionics
controller - but I guess others work very similarly) prop controller has automatic
and manual modes. In auto simply pressing a button will cycle through
'Take off', 'Climb' and 'cruise' settings. The target rpm for each mode can be
adjusted but will stay the way you last set it unless you do something about
it. So in practice, I press the button to change from T/O to Climb at the same
time as I pull flaps up, and press the button again to change to cruise when
I level out into some sort of cruise. There is no need to be constantly checking
rpm as the controller does that for you, so you can spend 99+% of your time
looking out and avoiding other circuit traffic. Much of what you may have read
about the importance of matching rpm to manifold pressure is simply not applicable
to Rotax engines. They tolerate any combination of rpm/manifold pressure,
and in practice you can choose to cruise at 4800/75% or 5300/60%power or whatever.
Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
Sent from my iPad
On 11 Jan 2012, at 11:35, David Joyce <davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk> wrote:
>
> John, I can reply in two ways. Firstly in practical terms if you haven't tried
it you should. There is a really noticeable difference in how quickly you slow
down with the engine idling and the prop either in it's normal fine mode or
fully coarse.
> Alternatively looking at things from a theoretical viewpoint, the total
drag for my DG300 glider at optimum glide angle(1:42) is around15 to 20lbs,
(dividing AUW by 42) at around 60kts. For my mono at it's best glide angle of
1:12 at 60 kts it is around 80 to 100 lbs. Now if you stick your hand out of your
car window going down the road at 60 kts/70mph and make it 'fully fine' the
force on your hand is something more than 10lbs. Imagine your hand enlarged
to the dimensions of three prop blades and you have accounted for much of the
difference in drag of my glider and my Europa!
> Having the engine idling doesn't make too much odds. At 1600 rpm a typical
fine pitch tip angle of 20 degrees is equivalent to 9 kts. air flow. In
fact it is worse than that if you have warp drive blades or indeed most other
prop blades seen on Europas, which have low blade twist, which means that the
central and inner portions of the blades are producing significantly lower air
flow rates.
> So my thesis is that an idling or stationary prop is responsible for
a high proportion of drag (admittedly somewhat lower if you have all those extra
wheels!!), and trying to slow down with the prop feathered is rather like
trying to land a glider without air brake - you can float in ground effect down
a long field until stopped by the far hedge!
> Hope that all makes sense! Happy landings, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 11 Jan 2012, at 08:53, "John Wighton" <john@wighton.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> I would like David to validate his last comment - field length dependent upon
prop pitch when stopped.
>>
>> When the prop is turning: The fine pitch gives lower residual thrust, hence
field length is potentially decreased. Feathering is not an option when engine
is working.
>>
>> When the prop is stopped: There is a reduction in drag when the prop pitch is
set feathered but this should not alter the field length used for landing?
Arguably there is slightly lower drag when feathered, but this is negligible to
the total drag of the a/c in landing config.
>>
>> Sorry to highjack the thread but this may be important for us with feathering
props if in a forced landing situation - tinkering with the feathering switch
may not be the most efficient use of our time at that phase of the flight!
>>
>> I have the Airmaster AP332 with AP200 controller setup and recommend it.
>>
>> --------
>> John Wighton
>> Europa XS trigear G-IPOD
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=363021#363021
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | =?ISO-8859-1?Q?RE=3A_Europa-List=3A_Re=3A_VP_prop=2C_?= |
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?good_idea=3F_which_one=3F?
X-mailer: iolo System Shield 10.7.6.28
Hi All,
Having recently fitted a CS prop (in the last 9 months) I am inclined to
agree with Peter when he says the VP prop is either optimised for take-off
or cruise performance - although it gives much more flexibility when
compared to a fixed pitch.
We fitted our Woodcomp prop in the belief that it would significantly
improve the take-off but IMHO it has made little difference compared to the
original fixed pitch Warp Drive prop. I have concluded this is because we
have an 80 hp engine and there is a limit as to how much power you can get
out of the setup. The limiting factor is of course the maximum RPM (5,700 on
take-off).
Where we have noticed a significant improvement is in the cruise. Previously
the maximum indicated speed in cruise was 135 kts - this has now increased
to about 145 kts. The reason I say indicated speed is because I believe our
ASI over reads by about 5 kts. There has been no increase in fuel burn and
if anything it is better (which is what you would expect).
Using a 912S or 914 there should be greater benefits/ improvements using a
VP prop especially with regard to take off performance.
Regarding our choice of propeller (ie: Woodcomp) there have been some
adverse comments posted in the past. All we can say is that overall are very
pleased with the Woodcomp and fitting a VP prop has certainly transformed
the performance of the aircraft (in many ways - also much smoother running)
. The controller we are using is the Smart controller which is very easy to
setup and use.
Just my 10p worth!
Carl Pattinson
G-LABS
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Peter Jeffers
Sent: 11 January 2012 09:17
Subject: RE: Europa-List: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one?
--> <pjeffers@talktalk.net>
HI Graham,
What I had meant to infer was that the fixed pitch props work ideally for
cruise OR take off, depending on how you set them. They are a compromise
every where else.
Sorry for the confusion. It must have been the wine??
Pete
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of graeme bird
Sent: 10 January 2012 20:05
Subject: Europa-List: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one?
Thanks Pete, yes I know its 5800 for a brief period only (5min) - but thats
long enough to take a speed reading.
Why did you say TO performance OR cruise, surely you improve both by setting
fine for take off and course for cruise. What speed would you expect in the
cruise?
Regards
--------
Graeme Bird
G-UMPY
Mono Classic/XS FWFD 912ULS/Warp drive FP Just Test Flying to obtain permit
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=362968#362968
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
_______________________________________
No infections found in this incoming message Scanned by iolo System Shield.
http://www.iolo.com
_______________________________________
No infections found in this outgoing message
Scanned by iolo System Shield
http://www.iolo.com
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? |
David,
Thanks for the reply/description. Having been an aeronautical engineer for 30
years l appreciate both the theoretical and practical analysis of a problem.
Clearly you have a heap more experience in the practical sense, especially w.r.t.
Europa flying.
I have at hand a bunch of tools (including Fluid-Dynamic Lift and Drag by Hoerner/Borst,
CFD programs, etc) from which l would happily spend hours/days/weeks
quantifying this discussion. But that will have to wait until l finish this
pesky A380 work on my desk right now.
A rough calc (@50kt landing to standstill), along the lines of your suggestion,
reveals a flat plate drag load of about 96 lbf for the fine (zero degrees in
fact) pitched prop prop (4lbf for the feathered prop). This will reduce quickly
with the square of the speed (@25 kts max load is approx 24 lbf). The proportion
of total drag during the ground run will depend on a heap of stuff (tyre
pressures, ground friction), etc.
So unbraked l think you have a point. With normal (or higher) braking l think
the difference will be a lot less (as prop drag
--------
John Wighton
Europa XS trigear G-IPOD
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=363034#363034
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? |
John, I envy yoursophisticated tools! Once firmly on the ground then certainly
braking is important, but I guess it is bleeding off the speed from 60kts to where
the wing is no longer adding major lift (say 30kts) that the prop pitch is
important.
Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
Sent from my iPad
On 11 Jan 2012, at 12:32, "John Wighton" <john@wighton.net> wrote:
>
> David,
> Thanks for the reply/description. Having been an aeronautical engineer for 30
years l appreciate both the theoretical and practical analysis of a problem.
Clearly you have a heap more experience in the practical sense, especially w.r.t.
Europa flying.
>
> I have at hand a bunch of tools (including Fluid-Dynamic Lift and Drag by Hoerner/Borst,
CFD programs, etc) from which l would happily spend hours/days/weeks
quantifying this discussion. But that will have to wait until l finish this
pesky A380 work on my desk right now.
>
> A rough calc (@50kt landing to standstill), along the lines of your suggestion,
reveals a flat plate drag load of about 96 lbf for the fine (zero degrees in
fact) pitched prop prop (4lbf for the feathered prop). This will reduce quickly
with the square of the speed (@25 kts max load is approx 24 lbf). The proportion
of total drag during the ground run will depend on a heap of stuff (tyre
pressures, ground friction), etc.
>
> So unbraked l think you have a point. With normal (or higher) braking l think
the difference will be a lot less (as prop drag
>
> --------
> John Wighton
> Europa XS trigear G-IPOD
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=363034#363034
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? |
Hi there all,
I'm very impressed by the level of expertise available in this community,
many thanks to each and everyone. To put my stone on the edifice, I will add
that using a C/S prop (Airmaster on 912) give an additional comfort of
flight within perturbed windy weather, as the prop variation acts as a shock
absorber. Together with the very good profile of the wing make my flight
smooth, much better than some other comparable birds like Dynamics or
Lionceaux.
Max Cointe
F-PMLH TriGear Kit #560
912ULS Airmaster 400 hours
-----Message d'origine-----
De: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] De la part de John Wighton
Envoy: mercredi 11 janvier 2012 13:32
: europa-list@matronics.com
Objet: Europa-List: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one?
David,
Thanks for the reply/description. Having been an aeronautical engineer for
30 years l appreciate both the theoretical and practical analysis of a
problem. Clearly you have a heap more experience in the practical sense,
especially w.r.t. Europa flying.
I have at hand a bunch of tools (including Fluid-Dynamic Lift and Drag by
Hoerner/Borst, CFD programs, etc) from which l would happily spend
hours/days/weeks quantifying this discussion. But that will have to wait
until l finish this pesky A380 work on my desk right now.
A rough calc (@50kt landing to standstill), along the lines of your
suggestion, reveals a flat plate drag load of about 96 lbf for the fine
(zero degrees in fact) pitched prop prop (4lbf for the feathered prop).
This will reduce quickly with the square of the speed (@25 kts max load is
approx 24 lbf). The proportion of total drag during the ground run will
depend on a heap of stuff (tyre pressures, ground friction), etc.
So unbraked l think you have a point. With normal (or higher) braking l
think the difference will be a lot less (as prop drag
--------
John Wighton
Europa XS trigear G-IPOD
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=363034#363034
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? |
Hi All
I have an AirMaster 332 with Warpdrive blades. There are some
considerations to take into account in a couple of areas.
I have found this hub to be very robust and its maintenance requirements
are low. You do need to consider the cost of repair. The cost of sending
it internationally is a very high part of the repair bill and cycle time.
If you live in Europe, then Woodcomp is as local as it gets.
If you live in the US, then whirlwindaviation.com is local.
I can say that Airmaster are responsive, and the service is probably as
good as it gets for a one man show but for someone in the US this is a 6
week cycle time.
Of course you can be local but still offer poor service. :)
The next considerations is performance. From aerodynamic perspective the
Warp drive blades are very bad. Martin is working on alternatives.
The blades on the Whirlwind were designed by Jack Norris with Rotax in mind
and they are aerodynamically sound.
The has been good research and numbers published on the Woodcomp blades.
Lastly, the Whirlwind propeller is less than half the weight of an
Airmaster. For a 914 this is very important.
Cheers, Paul
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? |
Hi Paul,
For info, for those in Europe, Europa Aircraft are the repair agents for
Airmaster. They can carry out a limited range of repairs and will organise
the return to Airmaster if necessary.
Regards
Brian Davies
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Paul McAllister
Sent: 11 January 2012 15:00
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Re: VP prop, good idea? which one?
Hi All
I have an AirMaster 332 with Warpdrive blades. There are some
considerations to take into account in a couple of areas.
I have found this hub to be very robust and its maintenance requirements are
low. You do need to consider the cost of repair. The cost of sending it
internationally is a very high part of the repair bill and cycle time.
If you live in Europe, then Woodcomp is as local as it gets.
If you live in the US, then whirlwindaviation.com
<http://whirlwindaviation.com/> is local.
I can say that Airmaster are responsive, and the service is probably as good
as it gets for a one man show but for someone in the US this is a 6 week
cycle time.
Of course you can be local but still offer poor service. :)
The next considerations is performance. From aerodynamic perspective the
Warp drive blades are very bad. Martin is working on alternatives.
The blades on the Whirlwind were designed by Jack Norris with Rotax in mind
and they are aerodynamically sound.
The has been good research and numbers published on the Woodcomp blades.
Lastly, the Whirlwind propeller is less than half the weight of an
Airmaster. For a 914 this is very important.
Cheers, Paul
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: VP prop, good idea? which one? |
Hi Brian,
Thank for sharing the additional information. Without diminishing your
input up until now the work that local dealers have been able to perform
has been limited and things like blade replacements has required a return
to the factory.
With that said Martin has now made some changes to the hub that greatly
simplify replacement of the blades, and this change can be retrofitted to
existing hubs. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the local repair
facilities get themselves set up with alignment jigs and dye check and
static balance rigs to field replacement of blades.
Just as an FYI, I did purchase the adjustable back plates for my hub and I
plan to fit them over the winter. Martin has also identified two
alternative blades for the 332 hub that I am assisting him with testing.
I don't expect to be able to report anything for a while as I have brought
my airplane home for the winter to do those 101 small jobs that I always
put off over the summer.
Cheers, Paul
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Brian Davies <brian.davies@clara.co.uk>wrote:
> Hi Paul,****
>
> ** **
>
> For info, for those in Europe, Europa Aircraft are the repair agents for
> Airmaster. They can carry out a limited range of repairs and will organise
> the return to Airmaster if necessary.****
>
> ** **
>
> Regards****
>
> ** **
>
> Brian Davies
>
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: rudder springs |
Thanx for you swift reply. My build manual says, - the front of the
forward pedals' tube (on stbd side) should be 3.5 in back from front of
the footwell. I've checked my measurements & I'm about 1/4in more
rearward. this has resulted in my spring needing to be mounted approx
1in forward of the front of the footwell (not 3.5in as I originally
said!). My inspector is concerned this will interfere with the engine
mount & needs reassurance that this will be ok ? How can I implement
this?
----- Original Message -----
From: G-IANI
To: europa-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 9:42 AM
Subject: RE: Europa-List: rudder springs
Paul
I understand the problem. If the pedals are mounted in the position
specified in the CBM this should not occur. There should be just
sufficient length to the STBD foot well for the spring mount to give
adequate tension. I am surprised that you are looking for as much as
3inch of extension. Have you any idea why this has happened?
If you have mounted the pedals further forward (as I did with LAA Mod
10665) then you may need to mount the forward end of the STBD spring
forward of the foot well by about 1inch. I used a small piece of AL
angle bolted (with two bolts) to the foot well. This was not
specifically covered in the Mod application but my inspector was happy
with it.
Ian Rickard G-IANI XS Trigear, 300hours
Europa Club Mods Specialist
e-mail g-iani@ntlworld.com
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|