---------------------------------------------------------- Europa-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 09/22/14: 6 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 01:54 AM - Re: PV 50 Prop. (Peter Jeffers) 2. 04:29 AM - Re: PV 50 Prop. (Alan Carter) 3. 07:45 AM - Re: Performance chart Europa CLASSIC C-GPEL (David Joyce) 4. 09:04 AM - Re: Performance chart Europa CLASSIC C-GPEL (Christoph Both) 5. 12:12 PM - Rotax 912 S performances (Guerner Remi) 6. 08:11 PM - Re: Performance chart Europa CLASSIC C-GPEL (Bud Yerly) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 01:54:28 AM PST US From: "Peter Jeffers" Subject: RE: Europa-List: PV 50 Prop. Hi, Arplast is the firm that makes the PV 50 prop. They are French and are not good at communicating with non French speakers. To my knowledge there is no MM or life recommendations. I have operated a PV50 for about 1500hrs now over a period of about 15 years and can report the following problems I have had or come across during that period. 1 Using the original manual in flight pitch controller (yours maybe this type or either a Smart controller or Arplast electronic auto controller) The former suffers from re-chargeable battery pack failure resulting in failure to run fine. The other two seem to work OK but if used in auto all the time will b----ger the pitch change motor in about 200 to 300 hrs. When used in auto only for take off and landing the motor will have a considerably longer life. Having a spare motor is a good idea as they are usually on 6 week lead time from France. They also cost much money, 200 at last purchase. (It is possible to manually adjust the prop to a compromise pitch if you get stuck with the pitch change inoperative. 2 The prop hub suffers from moisture corrosion which manifests itself as corrosion of the blade pitch change bearings. I dismantle clean and re lubricate the hub on an annual basis to help alleviate this problem. I use a water proof grease for this purpose. Best to obtain from marine outlets and normally recommended for submersible components of boat prop shafts. If the bearings do get corroded they will need replacement. The bearings are standard and easily obtained but fitting them is a different matter all together, as a jig is required to refit the pitch drive dogs. 3 The crappy little pitch limit switches sometimes fall apart. They can be obtained from Maplin. 4 There is one AD issued by the LAA re fine pitch limit stop. Without this mod and with certain electrical failures the prop can run to zero pitch in flight. Not good. Re this last mod I have come across at least one instance where the mod has been removed by Arplast during their overhauling process. 5 Being as no special protection is provided for L/E's of the blades they can become quite badly damaged by stones. Limited repair work can be achieved by the use of ARALDITE RAPID ie the ordinary stuff you can buy for domestic purposes (NOT ARALDITE 320 the Blue Stuff supplied by Europa Aircraft). Apart from the above the prop works quite well for the price. It is also the lightest VP on the market hence a bit fragile. I have come across one cracked hub caused probably by prop strike that did not even brake a blade. Pete Jeffers LAA Insp. Rep -----Original Message----- From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan Carter Sent: 21 September 2014 20:54 Subject: Europa-List: PV 50 Prop. --> Hi, All. or I have a Arblast PV 50 Prop. and find in difficult to get any information on this prop. I know other Europa,s have this prop fitted, and there is no dealer in the UK. Servicing, all I know is to grease the jack screw. is there anything else to check, measure or inspect. Should one have a spare electric pitch motor, as failure would ground the plane. What is the tt to major overhaul, Regards, Alan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=430886#430886 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:29:53 AM PST US Subject: Europa-List: Re: PV 50 Prop. From: "Alan Carter" Hi Peter. Many thanks for posting such a comprehensive detail on the PV 50. As you know I an not a builder, but I find the PV 50 a nice looking prop and seems to work fine. Problem as you said ,difficult to communicate with, ( If they where based near Calais I could understand why.) I have the Smart controller, it needs a software update so to incorporate the new Take Off mode, done free of charge. just pay 10 postage. I like the idea of marine grease, sorry to have to ask, But what do I look for to check if my stop has this mod, And if possible a run through on how to remove and grease the hub, would be most useful to me and probably other PV 50 users. Regards Alan Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=430906#430906 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 07:45:24 AM PST US From: "David Joyce" Subject: Re: Europa-List: Performance chart Europa CLASSIC C-GPEL Christopher, Although not directly comparable, you may be interested in the following figures for my XS mono G-XSDJ with 914, Woodcomp SR3000/3/W, Smart controller and speed kit at 90% MAUW and 2000 ft unless stated otherwise: Max speed at 100% power (ie not using the extra 15% available for 5 mins only) TAS 156kts (164 at 6500ft) Fuel flow: 100kts 12 l/hr 110 13 120 14 130 19 140 23 At 10,000ft 150kts TAS (129kts IAS) 21 l/hr These figures came from a comparison I did between the low twist Sr2000 prop and the high twist SR 3000W prop, which showed the latter gave appreciably better performance with max speed being 4kts higher at various altitudes, fuel flow being on average 0.6 l/hr better, climb rate improved and cooling problems transformed. The increased top speed according to CAFE calculations was the equivalent of having an extra 4 hp! Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 02:03:46 +0000 Christoph Both wrote: > Dear Europa Community: > I thought you might find the following comments and >attached spreadsheet of interest. > I tested and tabulated fly data for Canadian C-GPEL on >SEPT 17-2014. You might be interested to see where the >most gain is for C-GPEL Classic 912S, Woodcomp 3000 two >blade propellor, Smart Avionic Prop Control. The data >collected, for 4950RPM where possible, is denoted >separately for fuel efficiency and speed with a linear >increase in MAP from minimum required power to keep the >plane at altitude, all the way to WOT, measured at 2500 >feet. There are some interesting jumps in the graphic >curves, most noticeable around the (EGT) point, where all >4 cylinders turned out to be exactly the same EGT within >10 degrees Celsius on a GRT graphic analyzer (meaning: >most effective combustion=best torque). So for most >efficiently butting into headwind best suggested would be >27.5MAP (115 IAS) while most efficient tailwind use >would suggest 24.5MAP (95 IAS) or even 23.5 MAP (91 IAS) >with a fuel burn of only 9.4 litres/hour (or 2.5 GAL/hr) >exactly as the book says. Endurance can be chosen at >22.5MAP with a fuel flow of only 8.1 litres/hr (2.16 >GAL/hr), magically arriving at 87 IAS, empirically found >to be the most efficient climb speed. Quite a magic >square this little airplane. This is all without any >speed kit or wheel pants. > Chris ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 09:04:20 AM PST US From: Christoph Both Subject: Re: Europa-List: Performance chart Europa CLASSIC C-GPEL Thanks, David! This confirms that the TURBO 914 is probably the best matched engine for this capable airframe. Christoph On 2014-09-22, 11:44 AM, "David Joyce" wrote: > > >Christopher, Although not directly comparable, you may be >interested in the following figures for my XS mono G-XSDJ >with 914, Woodcomp SR3000/3/W, Smart controller and speed >kit at 90% MAUW and 2000 ft unless stated otherwise: >Max speed at 100% power (ie not using the extra 15% >available for 5 mins only) TAS 156kts (164 at 6500ft) >Fuel flow: > 100kts 12 l/hr > 110 13 > 120 14 > 130 19 > 140 23 > At 10,000ft 150kts TAS (129kts IAS) 21 l/hr >These figures came from a comparison I did between the low >twist Sr2000 prop and the high twist SR 3000W prop, which >showed the latter gave appreciably better performance with >max speed being 4kts higher at various altitudes, fuel >flow being on average 0.6 l/hr better, climb rate improved >and cooling problems transformed. The increased top speed >according to CAFE calculations was the equivalent of >having an extra 4 hp! >Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ > > >On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 02:03:46 +0000 > Christoph Both wrote: >> Dear Europa Community: >> I thought you might find the following comments and >>attached spreadsheet of interest. >> I tested and tabulated fly data for Canadian C-GPEL on >>SEPT 17-2014. You might be interested to see where the >>most gain is for C-GPEL Classic 912S, Woodcomp 3000 two >>blade propellor, Smart Avionic Prop Control. The data >>collected, for 4950RPM where possible, is denoted >>separately for fuel efficiency and speed with a linear >>increase in MAP from minimum required power to keep the >>plane at altitude, all the way to WOT, measured at 2500 >>feet. There are some interesting jumps in the graphic >>curves, most noticeable around the (EGT) point, where all >>4 cylinders turned out to be exactly the same EGT within >>10 degrees Celsius on a GRT graphic analyzer (meaning: >>most effective combustion=best torque). So for most >>efficiently butting into headwind best suggested would be >>27.5MAP (115 IAS) while most efficient tailwind use >>would suggest 24.5MAP (95 IAS) or even 23.5 MAP (91 IAS) >>with a fuel burn of only 9.4 litres/hour (or 2.5 GAL/hr) >>exactly as the book says. Endurance can be chosen at >>22.5MAP with a fuel flow of only 8.1 litres/hr (2.16 >>GAL/hr), magically arriving at 87 IAS, empirically found >>to be the most efficient climb speed. Quite a magic >>square this little airplane. This is all without any >>speed kit or wheel pants. >> Chris > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 12:12:02 PM PST US From: Guerner Remi Subject: Europa-List: Rotax 912 S performances Jim and Heather, I am surprised by your reading of those Rotax curves as my own reading is very different. This is what I read: You can develop 75% power (51KW) with WOT up to 2300 ft. at 5000 RPM. You can develop 65% power (45 KW) with WOT up to 5700 ft at 5000 RPM. According to those curves, to get 75% power at higher altitudes, you need to run the engine at a higher RPM: for example, WOT at 5500 RPM gives 75% at 8000 ft, WOT at 5500 RPM gives 65% at 11700 ft. Regards Remi <<<<<>>>>>>> ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 08:11:32 PM PST US From: "Bud Yerly" Subject: Re: Europa-List: Performance chart Europa CLASSIC C-GPEL To all performance seekers. It would be beneficial to all of us owners whether we are equipped with a, fixed pitch, constant speed, 912/912S/914 owners trigear or mono to compare apples to apples as much as we can. Speed kits, attention to detail, CG, altitude, engine type, MP setting, Prop type, are all factors affecting our aircraft. Weight is not a huge variable on average cruise speed but it does affect the low speed end much more. I decided to do a drag polar and plot my performance over the recommended power ranges. (See Attached Spreadsheets of my first two days of testing at 1300lbs.) It is not terribly hard to do if your aircraft is equipped with MP gauge, fuel flow, and is capable of gliding with the prop stopped or better yet feathered. Start above your target altitude and pick a range of trimmed airspeeds on a smooth day. (With the engine off, practice over a landing area unless you are really confident in your restart.) Climb up and repeat over and over. Exciting stuff eh? In my personal data collection I chose to do the following: Drag polar was with a feathered prop at both 10,000 and 2500. Cruise was from 1000 to 10,000 as I really don't like flying higher (I have a great oxygen bottle, but hate to carry it). Unfortunately, too many years at sea level shows up when I am trying to do math in public above 10K without oxygen. My IQ goes from two to one. I am sure you can see from the drag polar the min point on the curve and note the power required for Max Endurance or L/D max is only 25 HP. Too bad the 914 loads up at 3500 RPM and 22 inches at that power setting (See your Rotax Operators Manual). For max range you guys have already figured out that you have to slow down to intolerable speeds of 95 Knots at 27 1/2 HP (point of a line from the origin to a tangent on the power curve). The RPM and MP again are well below clean plug running in my bird. You can also see the difference between the AP420 and AP332 on N12AY's cruise and climb performance. Best speed at max continuous is at about 7500MSL. The wide chord Sensenich gives better speed at 7500 MSL and is only slightly better in climb. I'm sure if I continued up to 15K I could get a bit more speed, but higher power means more fuel burn and it takes longer to get to 15K. (That's a different chart on optimum climb vs. range.) As one can see, I fly no lower than 4800 and 28 inches which is roughly 120 knots TAS which keeps the plugs clean without running up once in a while to clear the carbon. Flaw in my character. I just don't like going below 120 at cruise. ( My gas milage is lower at around 25-27). I have tried cruising at 4300/28 while flying in formation with a crippled bird. My MPG was awesome at over 30 MPG but again I was only going about 90KIAS at 4500 MSL. The engine after about an hour starts to miss, and requires me to run up to 5500 for a few minutes to clear the carbon. Get your bird tuned up and pick a nice fall day to do some performance data collection. I use my Go Pro camera to record things for me. Then sit down with the laptop and pull data down from the video. Regards, Bud Yerly -------------------------------------------------- From: "Christoph Both" Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 12:03 PM Subject: Re: Europa-List: Performance chart Europa CLASSIC C-GPEL > > > Thanks, David! > This confirms that the TURBO 914 is probably the best matched engine for > this capable airframe. > Christoph > > On 2014-09-22, 11:44 AM, "David Joyce" wrote: > >> >> >>Christopher, Although not directly comparable, you may be >>interested in the following figures for my XS mono G-XSDJ >>with 914, Woodcomp SR3000/3/W, Smart controller and speed >>kit at 90% MAUW and 2000 ft unless stated otherwise: >>Max speed at 100% power (ie not using the extra 15% >>available for 5 mins only) TAS 156kts (164 at 6500ft) >>Fuel flow: >> 100kts 12 l/hr >> 110 13 >> 120 14 >> 130 19 >> 140 23 >> At 10,000ft 150kts TAS (129kts IAS) 21 l/hr >>These figures came from a comparison I did between the low >>twist Sr2000 prop and the high twist SR 3000W prop, which >>showed the latter gave appreciably better performance with >>max speed being 4kts higher at various altitudes, fuel >>flow being on average 0.6 l/hr better, climb rate improved >>and cooling problems transformed. The increased top speed >>according to CAFE calculations was the equivalent of >>having an extra 4 hp! >>Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ >> >> >>On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 02:03:46 +0000 >> Christoph Both wrote: >>> Dear Europa Community: >>> I thought you might find the following comments and >>>attached spreadsheet of interest. >>> I tested and tabulated fly data for Canadian C-GPEL on >>>SEPT 17-2014. You might be interested to see where the >>>most gain is for C-GPEL Classic 912S, Woodcomp 3000 two >>>blade propellor, Smart Avionic Prop Control. The data >>>collected, for 4950RPM where possible, is denoted >>>separately for fuel efficiency and speed with a linear >>>increase in MAP from minimum required power to keep the >>>plane at altitude, all the way to WOT, measured at 2500 >>>feet. There are some interesting jumps in the graphic >>>curves, most noticeable around the (EGT) point, where all >>>4 cylinders turned out to be exactly the same EGT within >>>10 degrees Celsius on a GRT graphic analyzer (meaning: >>>most effective combustion=best torque). So for most >>>efficiently butting into headwind best suggested would be >>>27.5MAP (115 IAS) while most efficient tailwind use >>>would suggest 24.5MAP (95 IAS) or even 23.5 MAP (91 IAS) >>>with a fuel burn of only 9.4 litres/hour (or 2.5 GAL/hr) >>>exactly as the book says. Endurance can be chosen at >>>22.5MAP with a fuel flow of only 8.1 litres/hr (2.16 >>>GAL/hr), magically arriving at 87 IAS, empirically found >>>to be the most efficient climb speed. Quite a magic >>>square this little airplane. This is all without any >>>speed kit or wheel pants. >>> Chris >> >> >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message europa-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Europa-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/europa-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/europa-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.