Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 10:27 AM - Re: McCauley Props (Lee Taylor)
2. 10:42 AM - Re: RV7-List: I made a donation & I'm registering as a Marrow donor (Paul Pflimlin)
3. 11:36 AM - Aerobatics in Rockets (Scott Miller)
4. 11:54 AM - prop gyro loads -- was McCauley Props -- maybe more than you wanted to know (Mlfred@aol.com)
5. 12:44 PM - Re: prop gyro loads -- was McCauley Props -- maybe more than you wanted to know (Aaron Villery)
6. 01:31 PM - Re: RV4-List: Re: RV7-List: I made a donation & I'm registering as a Marrow donor (C. Rabaut)
7. 01:49 PM - Re: McCauley Props (Bill and Janet Asbell)
8. 09:02 PM - Re: McCauley Props (LesDrag@aol.com)
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 |
|
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Lee Taylor " <leetay1@idcomm.com>
Guys, this "Prop use for aerobatics" discussion has been going on
forever.
BE VERY CERTAIN OF ONE SIMPLE FACT! IF YOU USE A SHAFT
EXTENSION ON YOUR CRANKSHAFT, (which all the Rockets do), YOU SHOULD NOT
CARE WHAT KIND OF PROP IS ATTACHED, THE EXTENSION IS A TREMENDOUS LEVER
ARM THAT, IF YOU DO EXTENSIVE AEROBATICS, SUBJECTING THE PROP/CRANKSHAFT
TO STRONG GYROSCOPIC LOADS, YOU ARE IN EXTREME DANGER OF BREAKING THE
CRANKSHAFT!!!!! It is not the prop that will fail, it is the
crankshaft.
There will be absolutely no warning that you are developing a
problem, there will be no indications that the shaft is about to break,
you will just suddenly be without a propeller. And without its
substantial weight at the far front of your plane. And suddenly
extremely tail-heavy planes without ANY prop blast to make the tail more
effective ARE NOT flyable machines. P-E-R-I-O-D.
If you fly heavy aerobatics in a plane with a shaft extension,
(ANY plane with an extension), you are being just plain stupid. And
when you kill yourself AND YOUR PASSENGER because you lost your prop,
thereby instantly becoming uncontrollably tailheavy, you will be cussing
yourself for your stupidity all the way to the crash. Sorry, guys,
there just isn't any other way to look at this situation. It DOESN'T
MATTER if you have a fully acro-capable prop on your plane, if it is
mounted on a shaft extension, YOU DO NOT HAVE A SAFE AEROBATIC PLANE.
Please, do not be doing heavy gyroscopic-load acro in any bird with this
kind of design consideration.
Lee Taylor
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Bob & Toodie Marshall
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 9:54 AM
> To: rocket-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Rocket-List: McCauley Props
>
>
> --> Rocket-List message posted by: "Bob & Toodie Marshall"
> <rtmarshall@osb.net>
>
> Jim, You state no restrictions for the prop, what about the
> crankshaft on
> the engine or does the prop extension go away and we end up
> with a short
> fuse instead of a rocket? (;-)) Thanks for your reply. Bob N#999RM.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <LesDrag@aol.com>
> To: <rocket-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: Rocket-List: McCauley Props
>
>
> > --> Rocket-List message posted by: LesDrag@aol.com
> >
> > Perfect propeller?
> >
> > Kirby Chambliss was using a Hartzell composite propeller
> (about $35k) on
> his
> > Edge 540. Then he changed to the MT Propeller counterweighted blade
> aerobatic
> > propeller.
> >
> > For the F-1 Rocket or Harmon Rocket 2:
> >
> > 3 blade MT Propeller. MTV-9-B/198-52
> > No aerobatic restrictions. No life limit on any
> components. 3 blade MT
> > Propeller/spinner weighs 12 pounds less than a "J" 2 blade Hartzell
> > propeller/spinner. Exceptionally smooth. Equivalent
> performance to the
> Hartzell 2 blade
> > propeller.
> >
> > MT Propeller counterweighted propeller (High pitch (Low
> RPM) with low oil
> > pressure) also available. Recommended for aerobatics where
> momentary oil
> > pressure loss is probable. (Same blades & same performance.)
> >
> > However, this probably isn't an unbiased comparison. :-)
> >
> > Jim Ayers
> > HR2 OEM Distributor for MT Propeller.
> >
> >
>
>
> ============
> ============
> ============
> ============
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
<RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com>, <rv4-list@matronics.com>,
<rv3-list@matronics.com>, <rocket-list@matronics.com>,
<rv6-list@matronics.com>
| Subject: | Re: RV7-List: I made a donation & I'm registering as a Marrow |
donor
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Paul Pflimlin" <pablo@phonewave.net>
In the interest of elimlinating SPAM, what the hell does this msg. got to do
with RV's??
----- Original Message -----
From: "C. Rabaut" <crabaut@coalinga.com>
<rv4-list@matronics.com>; <rv3-list@matronics.com>;
<rocket-list@matronics.com>; "<aerobatic-list@matronics.com>"
<rv7-list@matronics.com>; <rv6-list@matronics.com>
Subject: RV7-List: I made a donation & I'm registering as a Marrow donor
> --> RV7-List message posted by: "C. Rabaut" <crabaut@coalinga.com>
>
> Okay Guys (and Gals),
>
> Donating was the EASY part (you can do it too, it will only hurt when
my wife aka "my banker" finds out). I also did some soul searching, cuz'
it's gonna take a lot of time & traveling, but I decided I'm gonna be tested
as a donor. I just registered and now I wait to get an appointment to be
tested. I gotta go up to Stanford Medical Center (it's the closest donor
center to me) and I'll let you all know how it goes.
>
> I hope some other folks will consider taking the plunge, either
donating $ or becoming a blood/marrow donor or both... ya'll know it's for
good/deserving people.
>
> check out
>
> http://www.marrow.org/HELP/join_the_registry.html
>
> or
> www.transplants.org
>
>
> Take Care and Take Air my friends,
>
> Chuck
>
>
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: | Aerobatics in Rockets |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Scott Miller" <scott65@quik.com>
Please, everyone, read what Lee Taylor had to say AGAIN! I have posted messages
here before about aerobatics in Rockets/RV's. These are NOT aerobatic machines.
Loops and rolls, yes, but not heavy "G's", or snap maneuvers. That is what
aerobatic means. Any airplane can be looped or rolled, and if done properly, and
should only be around 2-3 "G's". Just because the plane has a 6G wing, does
not make it an aerobatic plane. There are many other factors to consider. You
want to pull 6+ G's, then get a Pitts, or Extra, or something made for that.
The Rocket/RV is a sport/cross country machine, and should be treated properly.
Scott Miller F-1 #123
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: | prop gyro loads -- was McCauley Props -- maybe more than |
you wanted to know
--> Rocket-List message posted by: Mlfred@aol.com
In a message dated 1/6/2004 12:28:55 PM Central Standard Time,
leetay1@idcomm.com writes:
It DOESN'T
MATTER if you have a fully acro-capable prop on your plane, if it is
mounted on a shaft extension, YOU DO NOT HAVE A SAFE AEROBATIC PLANE.
Please, do not be doing heavy gyroscopic-load acro in any bird with this
kind of design consideration.
Lee Taylor
Hey Lee:
Good advice for those equipped with the metal blade extended hub props. I
hope you don't intend for all of us to simply fly straight and level for the rest
of our careers! I'm sure low rate yaw and pitch change maneuvers are OK .
After all, it ain't the "G" that is the problem -- that's simply an easily
understood measuring device for us dumb pilots -- it's the yaw or pitch change
RATE
that hurts. I think the engineers refer to this as "radians".
However, as usual, there are exceptions: The counterweighted MT, with it's
associated lower blade weight (FYI: installed weight of both brands {MT3 vs H2}
is about the same: 65LBS), has substantially less gyro force to put into the
crank. I would suggest this applies to the MT 3 blade replacement for the "M"
hub 2 blade Hartzells, so it would seem that if you want to toss your plane
around (safely, tho nothing is guaranteed), the lighter prop blades would be a
good idea.
As Jim Ayers noted, the non-counterweighted MT 3 blade weighs in at about
53LBS. This would seem to produce even less gyro loads, when compared to the
counterweighted version of the MT or the 2 blade Hartzell. However, beware the
Runaway RPM Demon if you flop around with one of these, and your ship is not
equipped with an inverted system!
Now, MT ain't the only game on the block: Whirlwind and Aerocomposite (sp?)
come to mind, along with the Hartzell "Claw". I think these designs are
compromised towards the low-speed hard-pulling area, where the MT designated for
our
ships is a high speed model, more ageeable with our usual flying style.
I would like to see the math comparison between a shorter C hub
counterweighted Hartzell (Pitts S2 equipment) and the MT extended hub -- I'll be
either MT
has less inertia loading...might be I can get my hands on such data -- stand
by.
Another way to lessen the gyro loads is to pull the RPM back -- 2300RPM still
nets outstanding performance with our ships, and the loads would be less...
Don't construe this as "The Rest of the Story" -- I'm sure there's more.
Carry on!
Mark
Team Rocket
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: prop gyro loads -- was McCauley Props -- maybe more than |
you wanted to know
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Aaron Villery" <Scudrunr@maine.rr.com>
Is there no way to eliminate the prop extension? Im not working on firewall
forward stuff yet so I can't look at it myself in order to figure it out.
Would some work on the cowl allow the use of a prop without the extension?
----- Original Message -----
From: <Mlfred@aol.com>
Subject: Rocket-List: prop gyro loads -- was McCauley Props -- maybe more
than you wanted to know
> --> Rocket-List message posted by: Mlfred@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 1/6/2004 12:28:55 PM Central Standard Time,
> leetay1@idcomm.com writes:
> It DOESN'T
> MATTER if you have a fully acro-capable prop on your plane, if it is
> mounted on a shaft extension, YOU DO NOT HAVE A SAFE AEROBATIC PLANE.
> Please, do not be doing heavy gyroscopic-load acro in any bird with this
> kind of design consideration.
>
> Lee Taylor
> Hey Lee:
>
> Good advice for those equipped with the metal blade extended hub props. I
> hope you don't intend for all of us to simply fly straight and level for
the rest
> of our careers! I'm sure low rate yaw and pitch change maneuvers are OK .
> After all, it ain't the "G" that is the problem -- that's simply an easily
> understood measuring device for us dumb pilots -- it's the yaw or pitch
change RATE
> that hurts. I think the engineers refer to this as "radians".
>
> However, as usual, there are exceptions: The counterweighted MT, with
it's
> associated lower blade weight (FYI: installed weight of both brands {MT3
vs H2}
> is about the same: 65LBS), has substantially less gyro force to put into
the
> crank. I would suggest this applies to the MT 3 blade replacement for the
"M"
> hub 2 blade Hartzells, so it would seem that if you want to toss your
plane
> around (safely, tho nothing is guaranteed), the lighter prop blades would
be a
> good idea.
>
> As Jim Ayers noted, the non-counterweighted MT 3 blade weighs in at about
> 53LBS. This would seem to produce even less gyro loads, when compared to
the
> counterweighted version of the MT or the 2 blade Hartzell. However, beware
the
> Runaway RPM Demon if you flop around with one of these, and your ship is
not
> equipped with an inverted system!
>
> Now, MT ain't the only game on the block: Whirlwind and Aerocomposite
(sp?)
> come to mind, along with the Hartzell "Claw". I think these designs are
> compromised towards the low-speed hard-pulling area, where the MT
designated for our
> ships is a high speed model, more ageeable with our usual flying style.
>
> I would like to see the math comparison between a shorter C hub
> counterweighted Hartzell (Pitts S2 equipment) and the MT extended hub --
I'll be either MT
> has less inertia loading...might be I can get my hands on such data --
stand
> by.
>
> Another way to lessen the gyro loads is to pull the RPM back -- 2300RPM
still
> nets outstanding performance with our ships, and the loads would be
less...
>
> Don't construe this as "The Rest of the Story" -- I'm sure there's more.
>
> Carry on!
> Mark
> Team Rocket
>
>
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 |
|
<rv-list@matronics.com>, <RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com>,
<rv3-list@matronics.com>, <rocket-list@matronics.com>,
<rv6-list@matronics.com>
| Subject: | Re: RV4-List: Re: RV7-List: I made a donation & I'm registering |
as a Marrow donor
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "C. Rabaut" <crabaut@coalinga.com>
Paul,
You're absolutely right. I sit corrected.
Chuck
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Pflimlin <pablo@phonewave.net>
<RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com>; <rv4-list@matronics.com>;
<rv3-list@matronics.com>; <rocket-list@matronics.com>;
<rv6-list@matronics.com>
Subject: RV4-List: Re: RV7-List: I made a donation & I'm registering as a
Marrow donor
> --> RV4-List message posted by: "Paul Pflimlin" <pablo@phonewave.net>
>
> In the interest of elimlinating SPAM, what the hell does this msg. got to
do
> with RV's??
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "C. Rabaut" <crabaut@coalinga.com>
> To: <rv-list@matronics.com>; <RV7and7A@yahoogroups.com>;
> <rv4-list@matronics.com>; <rv3-list@matronics.com>;
> <rocket-list@matronics.com>; "<aerobatic-list@matronics.com>"
> <rv7-list@matronics.com>; <rv6-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: RV7-List: I made a donation & I'm registering as a Marrow donor
>
>
> > --> RV7-List message posted by: "C. Rabaut" <crabaut@coalinga.com>
> >
> > Okay Guys (and Gals),
> >
> > Donating was the EASY part (you can do it too, it will only hurt
when
> my wife aka "my banker" finds out). I also did some soul searching, cuz'
> it's gonna take a lot of time & traveling, but I decided I'm gonna be
tested
> as a donor. I just registered and now I wait to get an appointment to be
> tested. I gotta go up to Stanford Medical Center (it's the closest donor
> center to me) and I'll let you all know how it goes.
> >
> > I hope some other folks will consider taking the plunge, either
> donating $ or becoming a blood/marrow donor or both... ya'll know it's
for
> good/deserving people.
> >
> > check out
> >
> > http://www.marrow.org/HELP/join_the_registry.html
> >
> > or
> > www.transplants.org
> >
> >
> > Take Care and Take Air my friends,
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> >
>
>
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: McCauley Props |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Bill and Janet Asbell" <cottonwood@charter.net>
Yea !!! Some one finally threw in some reality !!! This IS a 'GO FAST and
LOOK GOOD A/C !!! Get a PITTS if ya want a good acro mount.
Bill #32 helper and PITTS N9305P
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Taylor " <leetay1@idcomm.com>
Subject: RE: Rocket-List: McCauley Props
> --> Rocket-List message posted by: "Lee Taylor " <leetay1@idcomm.com>
>
> Guys, this "Prop use for aerobatics" discussion has been going on
> forever.
> BE VERY CERTAIN OF ONE SIMPLE FACT! IF YOU USE A SHAFT
> EXTENSION ON YOUR CRANKSHAFT, (which all the Rockets do), YOU SHOULD NOT
> CARE WHAT KIND OF PROP IS ATTACHED, THE EXTENSION IS A TREMENDOUS LEVER
> ARM THAT, IF YOU DO EXTENSIVE AEROBATICS, SUBJECTING THE PROP/CRANKSHAFT
> TO STRONG GYROSCOPIC LOADS, YOU ARE IN EXTREME DANGER OF BREAKING THE
> CRANKSHAFT!!!!! It is not the prop that will fail, it is the
> crankshaft.
> There will be absolutely no warning that you are developing a
> problem, there will be no indications that the shaft is about to break,
> you will just suddenly be without a propeller. And without its
> substantial weight at the far front of your plane. And suddenly
> extremely tail-heavy planes without ANY prop blast to make the tail more
> effective ARE NOT flyable machines. P-E-R-I-O-D.
> If you fly heavy aerobatics in a plane with a shaft extension,
> (ANY plane with an extension), you are being just plain stupid. And
> when you kill yourself AND YOUR PASSENGER because you lost your prop,
> thereby instantly becoming uncontrollably tailheavy, you will be cussing
> yourself for your stupidity all the way to the crash. Sorry, guys,
> there just isn't any other way to look at this situation. It DOESN'T
> MATTER if you have a fully acro-capable prop on your plane, if it is
> mounted on a shaft extension, YOU DO NOT HAVE A SAFE AEROBATIC PLANE.
> Please, do not be doing heavy gyroscopic-load acro in any bird with this
> kind of design consideration.
>
> Lee Taylor
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> > Bob & Toodie Marshall
> > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2004 9:54 AM
> > To: rocket-list@matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: Rocket-List: McCauley Props
> >
> >
> > --> Rocket-List message posted by: "Bob & Toodie Marshall"
> > <rtmarshall@osb.net>
> >
> > Jim, You state no restrictions for the prop, what about the
> > crankshaft on
> > the engine or does the prop extension go away and we end up
> > with a short
> > fuse instead of a rocket? (;-)) Thanks for your reply. Bob N#999RM.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <LesDrag@aol.com>
> > To: <rocket-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: Re: Rocket-List: McCauley Props
> >
> >
> > > --> Rocket-List message posted by: LesDrag@aol.com
> > >
> > > Perfect propeller?
> > >
> > > Kirby Chambliss was using a Hartzell composite propeller
> > (about $35k) on
> > his
> > > Edge 540. Then he changed to the MT Propeller counterweighted blade
> > aerobatic
> > > propeller.
> > >
> > > For the F-1 Rocket or Harmon Rocket 2:
> > >
> > > 3 blade MT Propeller. MTV-9-B/198-52
> > > No aerobatic restrictions. No life limit on any
> > components. 3 blade MT
> > > Propeller/spinner weighs 12 pounds less than a "J" 2 blade Hartzell
> > > propeller/spinner. Exceptionally smooth. Equivalent
> > performance to the
> > Hartzell 2 blade
> > > propeller.
> > >
> > > MT Propeller counterweighted propeller (High pitch (Low
> > RPM) with low oil
> > > pressure) also available. Recommended for aerobatics where
> > momentary oil
> > > pressure loss is probable. (Same blades & same performance.)
> > >
> > > However, this probably isn't an unbiased comparison. :-)
> > >
> > > Jim Ayers
> > > HR2 OEM Distributor for MT Propeller.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ============
> > ============
> > ============
> > ============
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
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: McCauley Props |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: LesDrag@aol.com
In a message dated 01/06/2004 10:28:55 AM Pacific Standard Time,
leetay1@idcomm.com writes:
BE VERY CERTAIN OF ONE SIMPLE FACT! IF YOU USE A SHAFT
EXTENSION ON YOUR CRANKSHAFT, (which all the Rockets do),
MT Propeller's are not the same as Hartzell propellers.
The MTV-9-B/198-52 propeller does NOT have a propeller extension between the
propeller hub and engine mounting surface.
The MT propeller hub attaches directly against the front face of the ring
gear.
According to Lycoming, the IO-540 engine with the 0.44" thick propeller
flange without lightening holes has no G limitations on the crankshaft or propeller
flange.
The MTV-9-B/198-52 propeller with a P-810-A spinner is a direct bolt on
installation for a Harmon Rocket 2 with the cowl spaced 3" in front of the ring
gear mounting surface.
Although there are no G limitations on this propeller installation, MT
Propeller does not recommend this propeller in flight operations which would cause
the momentary loss of oil pressure. The governor provides oil pressure to move
the blades from low pitch to high pitch. Loss of oil pressure would allow
the engine and propeller to overspeed.
The MTV-9-B-C/C198-52 propeller is what MT Propeller considers an aerobatic
propeller. The is no G limitation of this propeller.
The propeller blades are counterweighted, and the governor oil pressure
drives the blades from high pitch to low with increased pressure. Loss of oil
pressure will reduce the RPM of the engine.
IMHO, the MTV-9-B-C/C198-52 with a P-810-A spinner is the ultimate "go fast"
and "aerobatic" propeller for a HR2 (or F-1).
Jim Ayers
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! --
|