Pulsar-List Digest Archive

Mon 10/22/12


Total Messages Posted: 7



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 05:51 AM - Propellor Choices (Bill Landucci)
     2. 06:51 AM - Re: Propellor Choices (Bernard Wilder)
     3. 07:08 AM - Re: Propellor Choices (Dennis Adams)
     4. 11:56 AM - Re: Propellor Choices (Brian Anderson)
     5. 12:42 PM - Re: Propeller Choices (Barry J Edwards)
     6. 01:01 PM - Re: Propellor Choices (freedom4life)
     7. 01:59 PM - Re: Propellor Choices (barrynorman@comcast.net)
 
 
 


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
    Time: 05:51:00 AM PST US
    From: Bill Landucci <bill.landucci@tds.net>
    Subject: Propellor Choices
    Hello All, I've been flying N168TM (Pulsar III - 912ULS) for almost ten years with the Arplast PV50. The plane is ready for a new prop. What are folks using these days with Pulsars? I must admit that the simplicity of a fixed pitch prop is appealing, but I'm afraid I may have gotten used to the in-flight adjustable's ability to optimize for climb and cruise. During the last flight the pitch motor failed to adjust the prop pitch. This time the electric motor is spinning freely so I suspect a stripped lead screw. In past years I've had that happen one other time, plus two failed electric pitch motors. Fortuntately the failure mode is always the same - pitch is stuck where you last had it. So as long as pitch range is limited to safe flight you're okay, but it does make the cross country longer when top speed is 110mph due to engine rpm. If anyone has old Arplast parts I'd consider buying. But something completely different might be the best solution at this point. Bill


    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
    Time: 06:51:47 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Propellor Choices
    From: Bernard Wilder <bernard.wilder2@gmail.com>
    Bill, Love my "P" Tip. The configuration of the tip reduces prop noise. It is supposed to flex 3 degrees. Might be my imagination but when I level off and reduce power I think I can feel it flex back and take a bigger bit of air. BUT - - - - it is fixed. Bernie Wilder On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Bill Landucci <bill.landucci@tds.net>wrote: > > Hello All, > > I've been flying N168TM (Pulsar III - 912ULS) for almost ten years with > the Arplast PV50. The plane is ready for a new prop. What are folks using > these days with Pulsars? I must admit that the simplicity of a fixed pitch > prop is appealing, but I'm afraid I may have gotten used to the in-flight > adjustable's ability to optimize for climb and cruise. > > During the last flight the pitch motor failed to adjust the prop pitch. > This time the electric motor is spinning freely so I suspect a stripped > lead screw. In past years I've had that happen one other time, plus two > failed electric pitch motors. Fortuntately the failure mode is always the > same - pitch is stuck where you last had it. So as long as pitch range is > limited to safe flight you're okay, but it does make the cross country > longer when top speed is 110mph due to engine rpm. > > If anyone has old Arplast parts I'd consider buying. But something > completely different might be the best solution at this point. > > Bill > >


    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
    Time: 07:08:51 AM PST US
    From: Dennis Adams <ghf4986@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: Propellor Choices
    Bill, I have the same experience as Bernie with the Prince Power Tip. Dennis Sent from an IPad On Oct 22, 2012, at 7:56 AM, Bernard Wilder <bernard.wilder2@gmail.com> wrote: Bill, Love my "P" Tip. The configuration of the tip reduces prop noise. It is supposed to flex 3 degrees. Might be my imagination but when I level off and reduce power I think I can feel it flex back and take a bigger bit of air. BUT - - - - it is fixed. Bernie Wilder On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Bill Landucci <bill.landucci@tds.net>wrote: > > Hello All, > > I've been flying N168TM (Pulsar III - 912ULS) for almost ten years with > the Arplast PV50. The plane is ready for a new prop. What are folks using > these days with Pulsars? I must admit that the simplicity of a fixed pitch > prop is appealing, but I'm afraid I may have gotten used to the in-flight > adjustable's ability to optimize for climb and cruise. > > During the last flight the pitch motor failed to adjust the prop pitch. > This time the electric motor is spinning freely so I suspect a stripped > lead screw. In past years I've had that happen one other time, plus two > failed electric pitch motors. Fortuntately the failure mode is always the > same - pitch is stuck where you last had it. So as long as pitch range is > limited to safe flight you're okay, but it does make the cross country > longer when top speed is 110mph due to engine rpm. > > If anyone has old Arplast parts I'd consider buying. But something > completely different might be the best solution at this point. > > Bill<============ > y Browse, Chat, FAQ, > ="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pulsar-List" > target="_blank">http:==== > http://forums.mle, List Admin. > ==== > > > <http://forums.matronics.com/> <http://forums.matronics.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
    Time: 11:56:47 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Propellor Choices
    From: Brian Anderson <briana@xtra.co.nz>
    Hi Bill, I also have the PV50. It's done about 460 hours now [12 years old] and I have been wondering about the life. I remember reading in some of the early Arplast documentation [ - - very limited] that the nominal life was 500 hours. It's a great prop, and I agree about the performance improvements being able to adjust the pitch in flight. Some time ago I also had a motor failure. The motor just wouldn't start and move in one direction. I talked to Arplast and they sold me an "improved" motor. No troubles since. Each annual I open the prop hub, clean out any hardened grease and re-grease. In fact I did that yesterday, and checked the operation. All is OK. The new motor was supplied with the lead screw and bearing. The old bearing was a bit rough and lumpy too. In the meantime I had purchased a replacement bearing locally anyhow. It is a standard [metric] size and was easy to find. I can't imagine the lead screw stripping. It is fairly substantial. I was about to write an email to Arplast to ask about the life, and any particular maintenance that might be necessary. If I need to think about a new prop I would still think seriously about the Arplast again. Brian On 23/10/2012, at 1:50 AM, Bill Landucci <bill.landucci@tds.net> wrote: > > Hello All, > > I've been flying N168TM (Pulsar III - 912ULS) for almost ten years with the Arplast PV50. The plane is ready for a new prop. What are folks using these days with Pulsars? I must admit that the simplicity of a fixed pitch prop is appealing, but I'm afraid I may have gotten used to the in-flight adjustable's ability to optimize for climb and cruise. > > During the last flight the pitch motor failed to adjust the prop pitch. This time the electric motor is spinning freely so I suspect a stripped lead screw. In past years I've had that happen one other time, plus two failed electric pitch motors. Fortuntately the failure mode is always the same - pitch is stuck where you last had it. So as long as pitch range is limited to safe flight you're okay, but it does make the cross country longer when top speed is 110mph due to engine rpm. > > If anyone has old Arplast parts I'd consider buying. But something completely different might be the best solution at this point. > > Bill > > > >


    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
    Time: 12:42:06 PM PST US
    From: "Barry J Edwards" <barryjedwards@lineone.net>
    Subject: Re: Propeller Choices
    Hi Brian, I=99d be interested to hear what Arplast have to say about maintenance of an =98old=99 PV50. Mine is getting on for 15 years old and must have around 600 hours on it now. No problems at all with it since all the early problems were ironed out (mine was a very early model) but it would be nice to hear what they have to say. The UK distributer closed down a few years ago so there is no direct support (that I know of) in the UK. Barry G-XPXP Taildragger, 1040 hrs From: Brian Anderson Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 7:56 PM Subject: Re: Pulsar-List: Propellor Choices Hi Bill, I also have the PV50. It's done about 460 hours now [12 years old] and I have been wondering about the life. I remember reading in some of the early Arplast documentation [ - - very limited] that the nominal life was 500 hours. It's a great prop, and I agree about the performance improvements being able to adjust the pitch in flight. Some time ago I also had a motor failure. The motor just wouldn't start and move in one direction. I talked to Arplast and they sold me an "improved" motor. No troubles since. Each annual I open the prop hub, clean out any hardened grease and re-grease. In fact I did that yesterday, and checked the operation. All is OK. The new motor was supplied with the lead screw and bearing. The old bearing was a bit rough and lumpy too. In the meantime I had purchased a replacement bearing locally anyhow. It is a standard [metric] size and was easy to find. I can't imagine the lead screw stripping. It is fairly substantial. I was about to write an email to Arplast to ask about the life, and any particular maintenance that might be necessary. If I need to think about a new prop I would still think seriously about the Arplast again. Brian On 23/10/2012, at 1:50 AM, Bill Landucci <bill.landucci@tds.net> wrote: <bill.landucci@tds.net> > > Hello All, > > I've been flying N168TM (Pulsar III - 912ULS) for almost ten years with the Arplast PV50. The plane is ready for a new prop. What are folks using these days with Pulsars? I must admit that the simplicity of a fixed pitch prop is appealing, but I'm afraid I may have gotten used to the in-flight adjustable's ability to optimize for climb and cruise. > > During the last flight the pitch motor failed to adjust the prop pitch. This time the electric motor is spinning freely so I suspect a stripped lead screw. In past years I've had that happen one other time, plus two failed electric pitch motors. Fortuntately the failure mode is always the same - pitch is stuck where you last had it. So as long as pitch range is limited to safe flight you're okay, but it does make the cross country longer when top speed is 110mph due to engine rpm. > > If anyone has old Arplast parts I'd consider buying. But something completely different might be the best solution at this point. > > Bill > > > >


    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
    Time: 01:01:31 PM PST US
    From: "freedom4life" <freedom4life@xtra.co.nz>
    Subject: Re: Propellor Choices
    Hi Bill I have been using a Constant Speed Airmaster Prop for the last 1500 hrs on my Pulsar XP. In the circle of friends that I fly with more than 15 run this same propeller. I have not had to do anything to it other than replace brushes. It transformed my plane and I wouldn't replace it with anything else. The controller is simple to use and brilliant. There are others in the group running this prop so it would be good to hear their experience too. I'm not an agent for these but I certainly endorse them. http://www.airmasterpropellers.com/ Cliff Hello All, I've been flying N168TM (Pulsar III - 912ULS) for almost ten years with the Arplast PV50. The plane is ready for a new prop. What are folks using these days with Pulsars? I must admit that the simplicity of a fixed pitch prop is appealing, but I'm afraid I may have gotten used to the in-flight adjustable's ability to optimize for climb and cruise. During the last flight the pitch motor failed to adjust the prop pitch. This time the electric motor is spinning freely so I suspect a stripped lead screw. In past years I've had that happen one other time, plus two failed electric pitch motors. Fortuntately the failure mode is always the same - pitch is stuck where you last had it. So as long as pitch range is limited to safe flight you're okay, but it does make the cross country longer when top speed is 110mph due to engine rpm. If anyone has old Arplast parts I'd consider buying. But something completely different might be the best solution at this point. Bill


    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
    Time: 01:59:05 PM PST US
    From: barrynorman@comcast.net
    Subject: Re: Propellor Choices
    I have the GSC Inflight adjustable prop and it's been great for 7 years and 550+ hours. Performance is also great at a third of the cost at only 8.5 pounds. I believe every Pulsar that has won the old races at Sun and fun had one on it. Does anyone have results on testing/experience between all these props ? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Landucci" <bill.landucci@tds.net> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 8:50:02 AM Subject: Pulsar-List: Propellor Choices Hello All, I've been flying N168TM (Pulsar III - 912ULS) for almost ten years with the Arplast PV50. The plane is ready for a new prop. What are folks using these days with Pulsars? I must admit that the simplicity of a fixed pitch prop is appealing, but I'm afraid I may have gotten used to the in-flight adjustable's ability to optimize for climb and cruise. During the last flight the pitch motor failed to adjust the prop pitch. This time the electric motor is spinning freely so I suspect a stripped lead screw. In past years I've had that happen one other time, plus two failed electric pitch motors. Fortuntately the failure mode is always the same - pitch is stuck where you last had it. So as long as pitch range is limited to safe flight you're okay, but it does make the cross country longer when top speed is 110mph due to engine rpm. If anyone has old Arplast parts I'd consider buying. But something completely different might be the best solution at this point. Bill




    Other Matronics Email List Services

  • Post A New Message
  •   pulsar-list@matronics.com
  • UN/SUBSCRIBE
  •   http://www.matronics.com/subscription
  • List FAQ
  •   http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Pulsar-List.htm
  • Web Forum Interface To Lists
  •   http://forums.matronics.com
  • Matronics List Wiki
  •   http://wiki.matronics.com
  • 7-Day List Browse
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse/pulsar-list
  • Browse Pulsar-List Digests
  •   http://www.matronics.com/digest/pulsar-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.

    -- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --