Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 09:07 AM - Re: 2 blade to 3 blade (u2nelson)
2. 09:55 AM - Speeds Again (Bob & Toodie Marshall)
3. 11:53 AM - Props and vibration (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta))
4. 12:01 PM - Re: Props and vibration (Tom Martin)
5. 12:08 PM - Re: Props and vibration (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta))
6. 12:11 PM - Re: Props and vibration (Tom Martin)
7. 02:49 PM - Hartzell Props vs ????????????? (Morocketman@aol.com)
8. 04:42 PM - Re: Speeds Again (A1AVIATON@aol.com)
9. 04:53 PM - Re: Props and vibration (A1AVIATON@aol.com)
10. 04:56 PM - Re: Props and vibration (A1AVIATON@aol.com)
11. 05:32 PM - Re: Props and vibration (Bob J)
12. 05:34 PM - Re: Hartzell Props vs ????????????? (LesDrag@aol.com)
13. 10:11 PM - MT vs rain (f1rocket@telus.net)
14. 10:16 PM - Re: Hartzell Props vs ????????????? (A1AVIATON@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 |
|
| Subject: | 2 blade to 3 blade |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "u2nelson" <u2nelson@prodigy.net>
I made the switch from the Hartzell 2 blade to a MT 3 blade and the change
in vibration characteristics is dramatic. The MT runs like an electric
motor in comparison. My WFO and 2100 RPM Cruise speeds at 10K are down
about 2-3 knots, a fair trade for much more comfort. This was a bolt off,
bolt on modification that made a great airplane even better; and my true
airspeed cruise still starts with a 2.
Greg Nelson
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Stewart,
Michael (ISS Atlanta)
Subject: RE: Rocket-List: 2 blade to 3 blade
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)"
<mstewart@iss.net>
If I were convinced that the 3 blade would keep me cruising at 200ktas
AND be smooth like an electric motor I'd do it.
I would loose my big smile during cruise if my TAS indicator did not
start with a 2.
Thanks for the data.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
LesDrag@aol.com
Subject: Re: Rocket-List: 2 blade to 3 blade
--> Rocket-List message posted by: LesDrag@aol.com
Hi Michael,
I did some performance tests on Ted Rutherford's HR2 using his 2 blade
Hartzell (D blade) propeller, my 2 blade Hartzell (J blade) propeller
and my 3
blade MTV-9-B/198-52 MT Propeller.
We ran Ted's "D" blade Hartzell first, then the 3 blade MT propeller,
then
the "J" blade Hartzell.
The 3 blade propeller had the Lycoming engine running like it was an
electric motor. Both 2 blade propellers had the typical vibration
incorrectly
associated to the Lycoming engine. (The 3 blade propeller doesn't have
a second
order harmonic that is present with the 2 blade propeller. This is a
very
noticeable difference.)
There was no significant difference in cruise performance.
The Hartzell 2 blade propeller and spinner assembly weighs about 66
pounds.
The MTV-9-B/198-52 propeller and spinner assembly weighs about 54
pounds.
Not the 18 pounds you wanted, but 12 pounds lighter isn't bad.
You could replace the aft battery with a portable oxygen bottle in the
baggage compartment. The 3 blade propeller should make a noticeable
difference in
cruise speed above 10,000'. What better use for the HR2 climb rate
than to
get to 15,000' to 17,500', and then cruise fast with good fuel economy.
Best Regards,
Jim Ayers
_www.lessdrag.com_ (http://www.lessdrag.com)
(805) 795-5377
In a message dated 10/17/2005 7:19:57 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
mstewart@iss.net writes:
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)"
<mstewart@iss.net>
Looking for real world results on folks who have gone from the fat 2
blade Hartzel to the 3 blade blended or MT.
My speed is good but my comfort is not. Got a pretty good vibration
which I suspect is the fat 2 blade hartzell beating my airframe. I have
had 2 independent prop balances.
I am tempted of spend the $$$ on a smoother operation but my speed is
GREAT and I don't want to loose any. You know the drill. Real world
results please.
All things being equal, which they never are, would not mind loosing
some nose weight. If I could pull 20lbs off the nose I could pull a
18lb
battery out of my tail which is not doing anything for me except
ballast.
That would net me 38lbs off the airframe which I would love to
jettison.
I want smooth and speed. Please help.
Thanks
Mike
S8
Do not archive.
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 |
|
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Bob & Toodie Marshall" <rtmarshall@osb.net>
Gentlemen, My post yesterday received some criticism that I was being
sarcastic, that is not so, If one reads the previous posts by others about
speeds and props there was no data, If one wishes to find a solution to a
problem you have to analyze facts, I presented facts(numbers) to try and
create some debate on the issue, the numbers I presented are only a place in
which to start on a particular aircraft, as all rockets are a little
different, remember they were built at home on your jig or mine not
johns.The Issue has many sides, first a person wants speed, then smooth? or
some combination of tomcat, F16, or SR71.
My rocket is reasonably fast and doesn't vibrate a lot, I only have one
other person who was a rocket builder and flyer who made that statement when
he flew mine. But maybe I constructed mine differently, are all the seams at
the forward fuselage pro sealed and then riveted on your aircraft? do you
have a balanced and flowed stage three engine? are your motor mounts
new?does the canopy fit tight, and most of all what are the numbers when you
get your vibration? what type of gear leg fairings and cowl intersection
fairings do you have and do the fit snug? I had a pc of chafe tape slip out
about 2 inch's long and was beating on the bottom front side of my fuselage,
I thought I was having a engine problem because of the vibration. I blew
apart a gear leg fairing at about 230 MPH indicated doing a low approach at
my home airport now that's a vibration!! So my question remains, what are
the numbers? Blue sky's rocketeers! Bob Marshall, N999RM.
rtmarshall@osb.net Do not Archive
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: | Props and vibration |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
Thought I would follow up that thanks to Japundza(sp) that hooked me up
with a Hartzell prop guy who has figured out that I may(read do) have
the wrong isolators on my engine. I ordered from Vans their std engine
mount isolators thinking they were all created equal. Turns out they are
not. Duh. And the el cheapos that I got from Vans were originally
designed for 0-320, then used for the 360's but were never designed for
the hanging moment of a 540.
So in an effort of Hartzell trying to keep me from buying an MT, and me
from spending 10k, I have ordered the proper iso mounts for a 540. Lord
J-3804-20 is the proper ones and I have a set enroute. I will report the
results from my unscientific testing of how it feels. I am not convinced
that these iso mounts are all that different but I am not schooled in
such things.
Best
Mike
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: | Props and vibration |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Tom Martin" <fairlea@amtelecom.net>
I have 800 hours in five different rockets, all using van's standard
isolators. The thumping went away with a metal three blade Hartzell and a
three blade MT. Also I have NEVER had any engine sag that other builders
report. These were the mounts that John Harmon recommended on my first HRII
and they work for me.
Tom Martin
EVO ONE on the way
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Stewart,
Michael (ISS Atlanta)
Subject: Rocket-List: Props and vibration
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)"
<mstewart@iss.net>
Thought I would follow up that thanks to Japundza(sp) that hooked me up
with a Hartzell prop guy who has figured out that I may(read do) have
the wrong isolators on my engine. I ordered from Vans their std engine
mount isolators thinking they were all created equal. Turns out they are
not. Duh. And the el cheapos that I got from Vans were originally
designed for 0-320, then used for the 360's but were never designed for
the hanging moment of a 540.
So in an effort of Hartzell trying to keep me from buying an MT, and me
from spending 10k, I have ordered the proper iso mounts for a 540. Lord
J-3804-20 is the proper ones and I have a set enroute. I will report the
results from my unscientific testing of how it feels. I am not convinced
that these iso mounts are all that different but I am not schooled in
such things.
Best
Mike
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: | Props and vibration |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
Oh great, probably another $400 waist of my time.
Thanks for the great news Tom.
Mike
:)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom Martin
Subject: RE: Rocket-List: Props and vibration
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Tom Martin" <fairlea@amtelecom.net>
I have 800 hours in five different rockets, all using van's standard
isolators. The thumping went away with a metal three blade Hartzell and
a
three blade MT. Also I have NEVER had any engine sag that other
builders
report. These were the mounts that John Harmon recommended on my first
HRII
and they work for me.
Tom Martin
EVO ONE on the way
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Stewart,
Michael (ISS Atlanta)
Subject: Rocket-List: Props and vibration
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)"
<mstewart@iss.net>
Thought I would follow up that thanks to Japundza(sp) that hooked me up
with a Hartzell prop guy who has figured out that I may(read do) have
the wrong isolators on my engine. I ordered from Vans their std engine
mount isolators thinking they were all created equal. Turns out they are
not. Duh. And the el cheapos that I got from Vans were originally
designed for 0-320, then used for the 360's but were never designed for
the hanging moment of a 540.
So in an effort of Hartzell trying to keep me from buying an MT, and me
from spending 10k, I have ordered the proper iso mounts for a 540. Lord
J-3804-20 is the proper ones and I have a set enroute. I will report the
results from my unscientific testing of how it feels. I am not convinced
that these iso mounts are all that different but I am not schooled in
such things.
Best
Mike
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: | Props and vibration |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Tom Martin" <fairlea@amtelecom.net>
It will be interesting to see if you notice a difference and it would really
be nice if Hartzell would lend you one of their test machines so that you
could quantify the difference. Since a lot of guys are going to different
suppliers than Hartzell they just might be interested in saving this small
but growing market.
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Stewart,
Michael (ISS Atlanta)
Subject: RE: Rocket-List: Props and vibration
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)"
<mstewart@iss.net>
Oh great, probably another $400 waist of my time.
Thanks for the great news Tom.
Mike
:)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom Martin
Subject: RE: Rocket-List: Props and vibration
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Tom Martin" <fairlea@amtelecom.net>
I have 800 hours in five different rockets, all using van's standard
isolators. The thumping went away with a metal three blade Hartzell and
a
three blade MT. Also I have NEVER had any engine sag that other
builders
report. These were the mounts that John Harmon recommended on my first
HRII
and they work for me.
Tom Martin
EVO ONE on the way
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rocket-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Stewart,
Michael (ISS Atlanta)
Subject: Rocket-List: Props and vibration
--> Rocket-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)"
<mstewart@iss.net>
Thought I would follow up that thanks to Japundza(sp) that hooked me up
with a Hartzell prop guy who has figured out that I may(read do) have
the wrong isolators on my engine. I ordered from Vans their std engine
mount isolators thinking they were all created equal. Turns out they are
not. Duh. And the el cheapos that I got from Vans were originally
designed for 0-320, then used for the 360's but were never designed for
the hanging moment of a 540.
So in an effort of Hartzell trying to keep me from buying an MT, and me
from spending 10k, I have ordered the proper iso mounts for a 540. Lord
J-3804-20 is the proper ones and I have a set enroute. I will report the
results from my unscientific testing of how it feels. I am not convinced
that these iso mounts are all that different but I am not schooled in
such things.
Best
Mike
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: | Hartzell Props vs ????????????? |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: Morocketman@aol.com
DO NOT ARCHIVE Just my very humble opinion, but..............Has anyone
had experience with the "plastic" props in the rain. I had a wooden prop on
my RV-4 that was badly eroded by rain before I purchased the airplane. It
had leading edge protection, and had been repaired. I flew it "gingerly" (at
low-1,900 rpm) in rain, and it eroded badly again. I know the Whirlwind, and
I think the M.T. props have a stainless steel sort-of-tape on the leading
edge, but are they going to be damaged by flying through a rain shaft. (I
already know the ribbing I am going to get about flying through rain, but
sometimes it is not an option here in the Midwest U.S.) My fully I.F.R. Rocket
gets
some serious rain on the 2 blade Hartzell every year, and has not shown any
ill effects. And by the way, I think my prop is very smooth at all RPM's. I
have flown a Whirlwind on a Pitts Model 12, and I know they are smooth, but
all things considered, I am very happy with my stock Hartzell two blader.
Les Featherston "Airgasm" has 248 hours
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: Speeds Again |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: A1AVIATON@aol.com
WHO CARES WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE , FLY IT AND HAVE FUN, GET A JOB WITH BOEING
IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT NUMBERS, MIKE
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: | Re: Props and vibration |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: A1AVIATON@aol.com
I THINK JOHN H. RECOMENDS J-9613-12 MOUNTS, MIKE
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: Props and vibration |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: A1AVIATON@aol.com
WHAT IS THE NUMBER OF THE MOUNT THAT YOU USED, MIKE
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: Props and vibration |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: Bob J <rocketbob@gmail.com>
Hi Mike, I hope that works out for you. Let us know. I hung my engine with
the aerobatic mounts Van's sells, but don't have the Barry numbers handy,
and don't know yet how well they'll work. FWIW I have the liquid-filled Lord
mounts on my RV-6, and its very smooth. They came off a PA-28-201 (t-tailed
arrow) with very low time after a prop strike (read: free). So an
appropriate mount for the 540 with better dampening characteristics might be
80-90% as good as going the sledge hammer route with an MT (which we all
know is very smooth, but costly.) Out of curiosity, are the J-3804-20's used
on the RV-10?
An interesting tidbit I got a while back from Les at Hartzell was that a few
years ago before his time there they did a vibration survey on a Cessna and
found that bolting the engine solid to the mount with phenolic isolators
eliminated the vibration that they were trying to get rid of, but for
obvious reasons that wasn't a permanent fix. So along this line of thought
was why I went with the aerobatic isolators. It may work, it may be rough.
Who knows. EXPERIMENTAL <-- 2" high letters.
Regards,
Bob Japundza
F1 #80
On 10/20/05, Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) <mstewart@iss.net> wrote:
>
> --> Rocket-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <
> mstewart@iss.net>
>
> Thought I would follow up that thanks to Japundza(sp) that hooked me up
> with a Hartzell prop guy who has figured out that I may(read do) have
> the wrong isolators on my engine. I ordered from Vans their std engine
> mount isolators thinking they were all created equal. Turns out they are
> not. Duh. And the el cheapos that I got from Vans were originally
> designed for 0-320, then used for the 360's but were never designed for
> the hanging moment of a 540.
> So in an effort of Hartzell trying to keep me from buying an MT, and me
> from spending 10k, I have ordered the proper iso mounts for a 540. Lord
> J-3804-20 is the proper ones and I have a set enroute. I will report the
> results from my unscientific testing of how it feels. I am not convinced
> that these iso mounts are all that different but I am not schooled in
> such things.
>
> Best
> Mike
>
>
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: Hartzell Props vs ????????????? |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: LesDrag@aol.com
Hi Les,
The answer is NO!!!!!
Better go look at the video at the Sun'N'Fun or Oshkosh MT propeller booth.
MT propellers pass the same water and ICE IMPACT tests required for all FAA
certified propellers.
"Hartzell makes very good propellers. MT propellers are better." quote
from Gerd Muehlbauer.
Regards,
Jim Ayers
Less Drag Products, Inc.
In a message dated 10/20/2005 2:49:59 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
Morocketman@aol.com writes:
--> Rocket-List message posted by: Morocketman@aol.com
DO NOT ARCHIVE Just my very humble opinion, but..............(Stuff Cut)
I think the M.T. props have a stainless steel sort-of-tape on the leading
edge, but are they going to be damaged by flying through a rain shaft.
(Stuff Cut).
Les Featherston "Airgasm" has 248 hours
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 |
|
--> Rocket-List message posted by: f1rocket@telus.net
OK so maybe I'm biased as I have laid my money out and have a three blade MT
hanging on the front of my ship but...
We (our company) has been operating a DO 328 with two six blade MTs on it. All
types of IFR conditions, and sand erosion (desert) conditions, and the blades
are holding up far better than on our King Air 350 (erosion being the main
difference).
I think after seeing what our props have gone though in the last 1000 hours, it
is a good indication that I should have no problem on my Rocket. OK yes our
props cost more than most of us have into the Rockets, but never the less, the
basic construction is the same for the MT props. No the MT doesn't look new
after 1000 hours, but not many props do.
Regards,
Jeff
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: Hartzell Props vs ????????????? |
--> Rocket-List message posted by: A1AVIATON@aol.com
HOW WELL DID THEY PASS, AND WHO IS GERD MUEHLBAUER, MIKE
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! --
|