Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:05 AM - Re: GT blades for V-530 (Chris Wise)
2. 01:40 AM - GT Propellors (Richard.Goode)
3. 02:45 AM - Re: GT Propellors (Olivier Vigneron)
4. 02:57 AM - Re: GT Propellors (Eric Wobschall)
5. 02:58 AM - Re: GT Propellors (Eric Wobschall)
6. 05:05 AM - Re: M-14P engine Heating (A. Dennis Savarese)
7. 06:04 AM - V-530C, W530 and V530 prop blades (Jill Gernetzke)
8. 06:29 AM - Re: V-530C, W530 and V530 prop blades (Roger Kemp M.D.)
9. 07:09 AM - Re: GT Propellors (Roger Kemp M.D.)
10. 07:14 AM - Re: Cold weather oil woes (William Halverson)
11. 07:38 AM - Re: GT Propellors (A. Dennis Savarese)
12. 08:21 AM - Percent RPM to Rpm help (N642K)
13. 08:35 AM - Re: GT Propellors (Eric Wobschall)
14. 08:55 AM - Re: Percent RPM to Rpm help (A. Dennis Savarese)
15. 09:04 AM - Re: Percent RPM to Rpm help (N642K)
16. 09:27 AM - Re: Re: Percent RPM to Rpm help (A. Dennis Savarese)
17. 12:09 PM - Re: GT Propellors (Chris Wise)
18. 12:48 PM - Re: GT Propellors (rick@rvairshows.com)
19. 04:00 PM - Re: Cold weather oil woes (keithmckinley)
20. 05:05 PM - Re:Re: GT Propellors (Cpayne)
21. 05:45 PM - Re: Re: Cold weather oil woes (Walter Lannon)
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: | GT blades for V-530 |
G'Day All,
I have been following the blog re the Whirlwind blades and note the email
from Eric re the GT Blades.
Please find the attached photo of my 18T at a Air Show performance.
Since fitting the GT blades, we have a shorter take off distance, a better
climb and cruise performance and as per Chris Sperou states, who is a Air
Display pilot of note in Australia and is cleared for aerobatics to 0 feet,
and has flown this aircraft with the old V-530 at Air Displays and states
that without a doubt, the performance with the GT blades
Is a huge improvement. Chris is of the opinion that it "hangs in" during the
manoeuvres far better than the V-530 Blades.
I have recently done a 2300nm round trip up north and I had absolutely no
bother getting in and out of short strips with full tanks, 3 people and
baggage.
I know of a Culp Special in Perth, Australia, that the owner has recently
fitted GT blades to the M14P and he clearly states that he has a better
performance and far less propeller turbulence from the propeller vortex
around the cockpit area.
So for my 2 bob I would have to say that what we are talking about with
regard to both props, is that they are both of a superior design and both
would offer a higher performance.
Here in Australia, the GT blades have proved to be superior in performance
on Yak 52, 18 and Yak 55 than the old V-530 blades. All round.
In fact, the GT blades fitted to the Australian manufactured Jabiru gives a
all round better performance than the original Jab blades.
This also applies to the rotax engine powered aircfat.
Cheers from Downsouth.
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Eric Wobschall
Sent: Wednesday, 19 January 2011 11:26 AM
Subject: Yak-List: GT blades for V-530
As long as we're talking about propeller options, I think we're overlooking
the GT blades for the V-530, which have been in use for several years on
dozens of airplanes. The Aerostar factory furnishes them on new Yak-52s as
an option (I think they said there was a recent order of 20). We have tested
them on the Sukhoi SU-26M and Yak-52 with great results.
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 |
|
>From everything I have heard I suspect that the GT blades do give a good
advantage over the V-530 blades.But then the V-530 is a 50+ year old
design,so a new blade really SHOULD perform a lot better!
But when is someone going to produce proper scientific performance
figures comparing these different props,including MT,rather than saying
that"acceleration is much better",or similar subjective assesments??
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
I=92m currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone
is +94 779 132 160.
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: GT Propellors |
I found something not so good about the GT Prop: http://gtpropellers.com/
<http://gtpropellers.com/>Of course a problem is always a possibility but
the AAIB's conclusions are very bad:
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/bulletins/september_2009/speedtwin_st2_
_g_stdl.cfm
<http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/bulletins/september_2009/speedtwin_st2
__g_stdl.cfm>
Olivier
2011/1/19 Richard.Goode <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
> From everything I have heard I suspect that the GT blades do give a good
> advantage over the V-530 blades.But then the V-530 is a 50+ year old
> design,so a new blade really SHOULD perform a lot better!
> But when is someone going to produce proper scientific performance figure
s
> comparing these different props,including MT,rather than saying
> that"acceleration is much better",or similar subjective assesments??
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Hereford
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com
> I=92m currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone
is
> +94 779 132 160.
>
>
> *
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
> *
>
>
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: GT Propellors |
That isn't this model of GT propeller, and I have never known GT to be
anything less than responsive. This is not some company that just popped
up overnight, and they make propellers for a pretty large range of
aircraft including historic warbirds like Spitfires. As you know,
anything can be put on the internet.
On Jan 19, 2011, at 5:42 AM, Olivier Vigneron wrote:
> I found something not so good about the GT Prop:
http://gtpropellers.com/
>
> Of course a problem is always a possibility but the AAIB's conclusions
are very bad:
>
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/bulletins/september_2009/speedtwin_st2
__g_stdl.cfm
>
> Olivier
>
> 2011/1/19 Richard.Goode <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
> =46rom everything I have heard I suspect that the GT blades do give a
good advantage over the V-530 blades.But then the V-530 is a 50+ year
old design,so a new blade really SHOULD perform a lot better!
> But when is someone going to produce proper scientific performance
figures comparing these different props,including MT,rather than saying
that"acceleration is much better",or similar subjective assesments??
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Hereford
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com
> I=92m currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local
phone is +94 779 132 160.
>
>
>
>
> et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
> tp://forums.matronics.com
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
>
>
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: GT Propellors |
Richard:
I did find this data from Rick Volker, which I realize is anecdotal, but
I think still useful and coming from someone who knows what he's doing:
> Max level speed: mtv3=gt= v530=330kph
> Mtv9 slower by 10 kph
> Max cruise: mtv3=gt=v530=305kph
> Mtv9 slower by 8 kph
> Full power stall speed: V530=65 mph,mtv3=60 kph
> Gt=50kph , MTV 9= < 50 kph(hovering possible)-below measurable
airspeed
> Vertical penetration from 6G pull,330kph:
> V530=1600', mtv3=1700', GT=1700',Mtv9 00'
> Time on vertical line: v530=17 second. Mtv3 second. GT
seconds.MTV 9= >30 second (hovering).
> Time to climb 1000' to 2000': v530 second.
> GT= 20 second., mtv3=17 second, mtv9=17 seconds.
> Level acceleration full power, 200kph to 300kph:
> V530= 17sec. GT= 17sec. Mtv3=15 sec.mtv9=16 second.
> Descent rate at idle with prop at 100%rpm:
> Mtv9 =15 sec/1000',GT=32sec/1000',v530=35sec/1000',mtv3=
40sec/1000'
> Note: the MTV 9 has longer blades and was optimized for static thrust.
It stays much flatter power off, is significantly slower in speed, but
will hover this weight aircraft.
> The GT has more static thrust than the MTV3 and more thrust from 0 to
120kph. It loses to the mtv3 at 170kph Vy climb and at 200-300kph
acceleration, but has same top speed and cruise speed. The GT power off
descent rate is high, suggesting the blades stay very flat at power off
.
> The GT was only static balanced and was much lower vibration than the
v530 which had been dynamic balanced. The MTV3 and MTV9 had been dynamic
balanced and were by far the smoothest props. It would be conceivable
that the GT would be smoother if dynamic balanced. The GT may need a
spinner with backing plate to allow dynamic balancing to the same level
as a three blade prop. GT is developing a carbon fiber spinner that is
46 cm wide for the V530 hub.
> Vertical penetration and time on vertical line upwards were equal with
mtv3 vs GT.
> =46rom these tests, the GT is as good as the mtv3-250 three blade prop
during aerobatics and may be as good an all around prop for aerobatics,
travel, and short field take offs. The mtv9-260-29 has been optimized
for aerobatics and air shows at the expense of slower cruise, max speed,
and poor glide characteristics. It would be advisable to test the GT
against the MTV9-250 with both the-27 and -29 blades.
> The GT is superior to the v530 in static thrust, vertical penetration,
power on stall, and vibration. It is equal in climb, midspeed
acceration,cruise,and top speed. The GT has a slightly worse power off
glide than the v530. There is also more propeller braking with the GT
than with the V530 on roll out after landing.
On Jan 19, 2011, at 4:43 AM, Richard.Goode wrote:
> =46rom everything I have heard I suspect that the GT blades do give a
good advantage over the V-530 blades.But then the V-530 is a 50+ year
old design,so a new blade really SHOULD perform a lot better!
> But when is someone going to produce proper scientific performance
figures comparing these different props,including MT,rather than saying
that"acceleration is much better",or similar subjective assesments??
> Richard Goode Aerobatics
> Rhodds Farm
> Lyonshall
> Hereford
> HR5 3LW
> United Kingdom
>
> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
> www.russianaeros.com
> I=92m currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local
phone is +94 779 132 160.
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: M-14P engine Heating |
Yes, that's 100% correct Doc. On the Yak's the oil temperature probes
are fitted to the canister on the side of the main oil screen. Thus the
temperature of the oil coming from the oil tank to the main oil screen
is where the oil temperature is read on the instrument. There are 2
temperature probes on the canister. One for each cockpit.
On the CJ, it has both an inlet and outlet oil temperature probes with a
toggle switch in the cockpit. Flip the toggle one way and you read
inlet temperature. Flip the toggle the other way and you read engine
outlet oil temperature. Good way to know how well your oil cooler is
working.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-285-6263
334-546-8182 (cell)
Skype: Yakguy1
www.yak-52.com
On 1/18/2011 7:28 PM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "Roger Kemp M.D."<viperdoc@mindspring.com>
>
>> From the translated IAK-52 Flight Manual P. 24 3.4.3. Engine Heating
> 3.4.3.1 The engine is heated at 41-44% engine speed until the oil temperature
at engine intake begins to increase. When the oil temperature begins to increase,
the speed is accelerated up to 41-48% ( in winter time up to 51%) and maintaining
this value of engine speed, the engine is heated until the cylinders
heads temperature is 120 deg.C minimum and the oil temperature at the engine
intake is 40 deg C minimum.
> In wintertime, to hasten the engine heating, the cowl flaps and the oil radiator
choke must be closed.
> 3.4.3.2 The engine is considered heated when the cylinders heads temperature
is 120 deg C minimum and the oil temperature at engine intake is 40 deg C minimum.
> So the oil temp is measured at the intake according to the manual.
> Doc
> Sent from my iPad
>
>
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: | V-530C, W530 and V530 prop blades |
Guys,
Back in 2004, we became concerned about the future availability of the
original V-530 prop blades. Carl and I had been to Vpered in 2000 and
placed an order for 10 sets of new blades which never came to fruition. .
You can go to their website and it looks like they are still being
manufactured, but I wish you all of the luck in the world trying to get
anywhere with them. We began to talking to Jim Rust at Whirl Wind in El
Cajon, CA about designing and building a replacement carbon fiber blade for
us. Passing thoughts were given to recreating the same paddle blade as
original. Carl and Jim worked together on the design of our V-530C blades
(pictured on our website www.m-14p.com ). In 2006, I wrote the check and
signed an exclusive contract for the design and tooling costs of these
blades: M-14P, Inc. V-530C hollow carbon fiber blades.
Our guiding philosophy at M-14P, Inc. is maintain the M-14P and Yak as close
to its intended purpose. The American psyche is one that wants to
innovate, change, improve, economize and make better. I love that.
However, we are keen to take a step back and question "Why did they do
that?". The V-530 propeller hub is virtually bulletproof and field
serviceable. The failures I have seen are owner induced: Severe
over-tightening of the blade nuts and leaving the hub unprotected and in a
position that allows the ingress of water into the hub over a lengthy period
of time. For those 2 reasons, I unequivocally recommend the V-530 to a 52
guy. Model 12, Sukhoi and Yak 55 guys competing at the higher levels of
acro will want/"need" an MT prop. Repair costs are markedly different when
you ding an MT versus a V-530C or W-530 set of blades.
We wanted a blade that was:
1. A direct replacement of the V-530. It is. New ferrules are
machined for the blades. In years past, people have tied to reuse the
Russian blade ferrules.
2. A blade design that would match the V-530 performance, and if it was
any better that would be a bonus. The V-530C blades have done that. I have
2 great Yak 52 owners that have done several series of test flights on our
V-530C blades and are meticulous in the data collection and recording. We
have achieved our objective, but are still playing with the optimal blade
angle setting on the V-530Cs. Our next round of test flights are comparison
flights for the original blades vs. M-14P V-530C blades versus WhirlWind
W-530 blades. I will post the results to the list when we are finished.
3. Economical. Both the V-530C and W-530 blades sell for $6,000 USD
per pair. I talked to a customer this past week, who received a quote of
$18K+ on an MT prop. I believe the Italian blades are $10K + a pair.
Someone can correct me if I am wrong. I also believe they are a wood
composite, not carbon fiber. The also manufacture spinners and I requested
a quote for 10 units and never received a reply. Rick Volker was flying the
blades at one time, perhaps Eric will want to comment on Rick's experience
with the Italian blades.
The prop diameter on the V-530C blades is 98". The blades weigh almost the
same as original but the polar moment has moved closer to the center of the
hub. (Whirl Wind W530 diameter is 100" and original is 94.5")
The problem that Warren Hill has experienced with his new W530 blades was
discovered in our shop, as we were attempting to assemble a hub with our
V-530C blades. Whirl Wind does not do any hub work or carry any parts for
the V530 hub. We do. We are able to perform the work also and we
statically balance a prop assembly before it goes out the door. As a
business courtesy, if you are going to use M-14P, Inc. as your source for
technical support on the prop and are going to buy W530 blades , I would
appreciate the order . You will pay the same price for the blades whether
you buy from me or from Whirl Wind, but I receive a commission for the sale
if they are purchased through M-14P, Inc. The time and money spent
developing this blade program has been a large investment by M-14P, Inc.
with an eye on the continued ability to keep your aircraft flying
economically and well.
Jim also has a carbon fiber spinner on the burner.
Jill
M-14P, Inc.
www.m-14p.com
======
Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
(Email Guard: 7.0.0.18, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.16720)
http://www.pctools.com/
======
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: V-530C, W530 and V530 prop blades |
Thanks Jill for your update.
Doc
Sent from my iPad
On Jan 19, 2011, at 7:58 AM, "Jill Gernetzke" <jill@m-14p.com> wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> Back in 2004, we became concerned about the future availability of the
> original V-530 prop blades. Carl and I had been to Vpered in 2000 and
> placed an order for 10 sets of new blades which never came to fruition. .
> You can go to their website and it looks like they are still being
> manufactured, but I wish you all of the luck in the world trying to get
> anywhere with them. We began to talking to Jim Rust at Whirl Wind in El
> Cajon, CA about designing and building a replacement carbon fiber blade for
> us. Passing thoughts were given to recreating the same paddle blade as
> original. Carl and Jim worked together on the design of our V-530C blades
> (pictured on our website www.m-14p.com ). In 2006, I wrote the check and
> signed an exclusive contract for the design and tooling costs of these
> blades: M-14P, Inc. V-530C hollow carbon fiber blades.
>
> Our guiding philosophy at M-14P, Inc. is maintain the M-14P and Yak as close
> to its intended purpose. The American psyche is one that wants to
> innovate, change, improve, economize and make better. I love that.
> However, we are keen to take a step back and question "Why did they do
> that?". The V-530 propeller hub is virtually bulletproof and field
> serviceable. The failures I have seen are owner induced: Severe
> over-tightening of the blade nuts and leaving the hub unprotected and in a
> position that allows the ingress of water into the hub over a lengthy period
> of time. For those 2 reasons, I unequivocally recommend the V-530 to a 52
> guy. Model 12, Sukhoi and Yak 55 guys competing at the higher levels of
> acro will want/"need" an MT prop. Repair costs are markedly different when
> you ding an MT versus a V-530C or W-530 set of blades.
>
> We wanted a blade that was:
> 1. A direct replacement of the V-530. It is. New ferrules are
> machined for the blades. In years past, people have tied to reuse the
> Russian blade ferrules.
> 2. A blade design that would match the V-530 performance, and if it was
> any better that would be a bonus. The V-530C blades have done that. I have
> 2 great Yak 52 owners that have done several series of test flights on our
> V-530C blades and are meticulous in the data collection and recording. We
> have achieved our objective, but are still playing with the optimal blade
> angle setting on the V-530Cs. Our next round of test flights are comparison
> flights for the original blades vs. M-14P V-530C blades versus WhirlWind
> W-530 blades. I will post the results to the list when we are finished.
> 3. Economical. Both the V-530C and W-530 blades sell for $6,000 USD
> per pair. I talked to a customer this past week, who received a quote of
> $18K+ on an MT prop. I believe the Italian blades are $10K + a pair.
> Someone can correct me if I am wrong. I also believe they are a wood
> composite, not carbon fiber. The also manufacture spinners and I requested
> a quote for 10 units and never received a reply. Rick Volker was flying the
> blades at one time, perhaps Eric will want to comment on Rick's experience
> with the Italian blades.
>
> The prop diameter on the V-530C blades is 98". The blades weigh almost the
> same as original but the polar moment has moved closer to the center of the
> hub. (Whirl Wind W530 diameter is 100" and original is 94.5")
>
> The problem that Warren Hill has experienced with his new W530 blades was
> discovered in our shop, as we were attempting to assemble a hub with our
> V-530C blades. Whirl Wind does not do any hub work or carry any parts for
> the V530 hub. We do. We are able to perform the work also and we
> statically balance a prop assembly before it goes out the door. As a
> business courtesy, if you are going to use M-14P, Inc. as your source for
> technical support on the prop and are going to buy W530 blades , I would
> appreciate the order . You will pay the same price for the blades whether
> you buy from me or from Whirl Wind, but I receive a commission for the sale
> if they are purchased through M-14P, Inc. The time and money spent
> developing this blade program has been a large investment by M-14P, Inc.
> with an eye on the continued ability to keep your aircraft flying
> economically and well.
>
> Jim also has a carbon fiber spinner on the burner.
>
> Jill
> M-14P, Inc.
> www.m-14p.com
>
>
>
>
>
> ======
> Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
> (Email Guard: 7.0.0.18, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.16720)
> http://www.pctools.com/
> ======
>
>
>
>
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: GT Propellors |
You know for the majority of us that are using our YAKs and CJs for weekend a
ttitude adjustment the superiority
Of which blade beats the other by 3 seconds is academic. Blades separating a
t the hub, serviceability,static vs
Dynamic balance out of the box and overall safety of the blades are of great
interest. Expense of replacement
In this down turned economy is of greater interest. For those that need to r
eplace blades, cost,reliability, and serviceability are big issues. How much
damage to the M-14 do these new composite carbon fiber blades do to the M-1
4 when landed gear up at idle throttle? The reliable v530 turns to saw dust w
ithout generally destroying the engine necessitating an expensive engine rep
lacement. Any data out there on that?
We YAK and CJ'ers are a cheap bunch you know?
?^))
doc
Sent from my iPad
On Jan 19, 2011, at 4:56 AM, Eric Wobschall <eric@buffaloskyline.com> wrote:
> Richard:
>
> I did find this data from Rick Volker, which I realize is anecdotal, but I
think still useful and coming from someone who knows what he's doing:
>
>> Max level speed: mtv3=gt= v530=330kph
>> Mtv9 slower by 10 kph
>> Max cruise: mtv3=gt=v530=305kph
>> Mtv9 slower by 8 kph lia
>> Full power stall speed: V530=65 mph,mtv3=60 kph
>> Gt=50kph , MTV 9= < 50 kph(hovering possible)-below measurable airspe
ed
>> Vertical penetration from 6G pull,330kph:
>> V530=1600', mtv3=1700', GT=1700',Mtv9 00'
>> Time on vertical line: v530=17 second. Mtv3 second. GT second
s.MTV 9= >30 second (hovering).
>> Time to climb 1000' to 2000': v530 second.
>> GT= 20 second., mtv3=17 second, mtv9=17 seconds.
>> Level acceleration full power, 200kph to 300kph:
>> V530= 17sec. GT= 17sec. Mtv3=15 sec.mtv9=16 second.
>> Descent rate at idle with prop at 100%rpm:
>> Mtv9 =15 sec/1000',GT=32sec/1000',v530=35sec/1000',mtv3= 40sec/10
00'
>> Note: the MTV 9 has longer blades and was optimized for static thrust. It
stays much flatter power off, is significantly slower in speed, but will ho
ver this weight aircraft.
>> The GT has more static thrust than the MTV3 and more thrust from 0 to 120
kph. It loses to the mtv3 at 170kph Vy climb and at 200-300kph acceleration,
but has same top speed and cruise speed. The GT power off descent rate is h
igh, suggesting the blades stay very flat at power off .
>> The GT was only static balanced and was much lower vibration than the v53
0 which had been dynamic balanced. The MTV3 and MTV9 had been dynamic balanc
ed and were by far the smoothest props. It would be conceivable that the GT w
ould be smoother if dynamic balanced. The GT may need a spinner with backing
plate to allow dynamic balancing to the same level as a three blade prop. G
T is developing a carbon fiber spinner that is 46 cm wide for the V530 hub.
>> Vertical penetration and time on vertical line upwards were equal with mt
v3 vs GT.
>> =46rom these tests, the GT is as good as the mtv3-250 three blade prop du
ring aerobatics and may be as good an all around prop for aerobatics, travel
, and short field take offs. The mtv9-260-29 has been optimized for aerobati
cs and air shows at the expense of slower cruise, max speed, and poor glide c
haracteristics. It would be advisable to test the GT against the MTV9-250 wi
th both the-27 and -29 blades.
>> The GT is superior to the v530 in static thrust, vertical penetration, po
wer on stall, and vibration. It is equal in climb, midspeed acceration,cruis
e,and top speed. The GT has a slightly worse power off glide than the v530.
There is also more propeller braking with the GT than with the V530 on roll
out after landing.
>
> On Jan 19, 2011, at 4:43 AM, Richard.Goode wrote:
>
>> =46rom everything I have heard I suspect that the GT blades do give a goo
d advantage over the V-530 blades.But then the V-530 is a 50+ year old desig
n,so a new blade really SHOULD perform a lot better!
>> But when is someone going to produce proper scientific performance figure
s comparing these different props,including MT,rather than saying that"accel
eration is much better",or similar subjective assesments??
>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>> Rhodds Farm
>> Lyonshall
>> Hereford
>> HR5 3LW
>> United Kingdom
>>
>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>> www.russianaeros.com
>> I=99m currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local p
hone is +94 779 132 160.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics
.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution
>>
>>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
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: Cold weather oil woes |
Ah ... so that is more like 'output' side then ... OK thanks!
Now I know why I have been told you really do not want to run the engine with the
oil temp in the red .... boy on hot days in central California it doesn't take
long to get it to the red on climb outs ...
+-----Original Message-----
+From: Rick Basiliere [mailto:discrab@earthlink.net]
+Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 07:54 PM
+To: yak-list@matronics.com
+Subject: Re: Yak-List: Cold weather oil woes
+
+
+I'm working on putting a Wolf Filter on as we speak, in my 55M. The temp sensor
is downstream of the oil tank and upstream of the "filter" (Russian for the
large screen on the firewall) and way upstream of the oil pump.
+Respectfully
+Rick b
+.
+
+-----Original Message-----
+>From: William Halverson <william@netpros.net>
+>Sent: Jan 18, 2011 8:19 PM
+>To: yak-list@matronics.com
+>Subject: Re: Yak-List: Cold weather oil woes
+>
+>
+>
+>As I recall in my stock yak-55, the gauge reads oil inlet temp ...
+>
+>+-----Original Message-----
+>+From: Larry Pine [mailto:threein60@yahoo.com]
+>+Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 03:32 PM
+>+To: yak-list@matronics.com
+>+Subject: Re: Yak-List: Cold weather oil woes
+>+
+>+You must be referring to the Yak MM. I have a CJ, procedures would most likely
be identical but I don't have a Yak MM... So do share. Does the manual call
out inlet temps to be monitored or outlet?
+>+
+>+Larry Pine
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: GT Propellors |
Now THAT's clearly one of the most intelligent comments on the subject
of prop blades I've heard. Thanks Doc for bringing me and probably some
other folks on the list back down to earth.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-285-6263
334-546-8182 (cell)
Skype: Yakguy1
www.yak-52.com
On 1/19/2011 9:06 AM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
> You know for the majority of us that are using our YAKs and CJs for
> weekend attitude adjustment the superiority
> Of which blade beats the other by 3 seconds is academic. Blades
> separating at the hub, serviceability,static vs
> Dynamic balance out of the box and overall safety of the blades are of
> great interest. Expense of replacement
> In this down turned economy is of greater interest. For those that need
> to replace blades, cost,reliability, and serviceability are big issues.
> How much damage to the M-14 do these new composite carbon fiber blades
> do to the M-14 when landed gear up at idle throttle? The reliable v530
> turns to saw dust without generally destroying the engine necessitating
> an expensive engine replacement. Any data out there on that?
> We YAK and CJ'ers are a cheap bunch you know?
> ?^))
> doc
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 19, 2011, at 4:56 AM, Eric Wobschall <eric@buffaloskyline.com
> <mailto:eric@buffaloskyline.com>> wrote:
>
>> Richard:
>>
>> I did find this data from Rick Volker, which I realize is anecdotal,
>> but I think still useful and coming from someone who knows what he's
>> doing:
>>
>>> Max level speed: mtv3=gt= v530=330kph
>>> Mtv9 slower by 10 kph
>>> Max cruise: mtv3=gt=v530=305kph
>>> Mtv9 slower by 8 kph lia
>>> Full power stall speed: V530=65 mph,mtv3=60 kph
>>> Gt=50kph , MTV 9= < 50 kph(hovering possible)-below measurable airspeed
>>> Vertical penetration from 6G pull,330kph:
>>> V530=1600', mtv3=1700', GT=1700',Mtv9 00'
>>> Time on vertical line: v530=17 second. Mtv3 second. GT
>>> seconds.MTV 9= >30 second (hovering).
>>> Time to climb 1000' to 2000': v530 second.
>>> GT= 20 second., mtv3=17 second, mtv9=17 seconds.
>>> Level acceleration full power, 200kph to 300kph:
>>> V530= 17sec. GT= 17sec. Mtv3=15 sec.mtv9=16 second.
>>> Descent rate at idle with prop at 100%rpm:
>>> Mtv9 =15 sec/1000',GT=32sec/1000',v530=35sec/1000',mtv3= 40sec/1000'
>>> Note: the MTV 9 has longer blades and was optimized for static
>>> thrust. It stays much flatter power off, is significantly slower in
>>> speed, but will hover this weight aircraft.
>>> The GT has more static thrust than the MTV3 and more thrust from 0 to
>>> 120kph. It loses to the mtv3 at 170kph Vy climb and at 200-300kph
>>> acceleration, but has same top speed and cruise speed. The GT power
>>> off descent rate is high, suggesting the blades stay very flat at
>>> power off .
>>> The GT was only static balanced and was much lower vibration than the
>>> v530 which had been dynamic balanced. The MTV3 and MTV9 had been
>>> dynamic balanced and were by far the smoothest props. It would be
>>> conceivable that the GT would be smoother if dynamic balanced. The GT
>>> may need a spinner with backing plate to allow dynamic balancing to
>>> the same level as a three blade prop. GT is developing a carbon fiber
>>> spinner that is 46 cm wide for the V530 hub.
>>> Vertical penetration and time on vertical line upwards were equal
>>> with mtv3 vs GT.
>>> From these tests, the GT is as good as the mtv3-250 three blade prop
>>> during aerobatics and may be as good an all around prop for
>>> aerobatics, travel, and short field take offs. The mtv9-260-29 has
>>> been optimized for aerobatics and air shows at the expense of slower
>>> cruise, max speed, and poor glide characteristics. It would be
>>> advisable to test the GT against the MTV9-250 with both the-27 and
>>> -29 blades.
>>> The GT is superior to the v530 in static thrust, vertical
>>> penetration, power on stall, and vibration. It is equal in climb,
>>> midspeed acceration,cruise,and top speed. The GT has a slightly worse
>>> power off glide than the v530. There is also more propeller braking
>>> with the GT than with the V530 on roll out after landing.
>>
>> On Jan 19, 2011, at 4:43 AM, Richard.Goode wrote:
>>
>>> From everything I have heard I suspect that the GT blades do give a
>>> good advantage over the V-530 blades.But then the V-530 is a 50+ year
>>> old design,so a new blade really SHOULD perform a lot better!
>>> But when is someone going to produce proper scientific performance
>>> figures comparing these different props,including MT,rather than
>>> saying that"acceleration is much better",or similar subjective
>>> assesments??
>>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>>> Rhodds Farm
>>> Lyonshall
>>> Hereford
>>> HR5 3LW
>>> United Kingdom
>>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>>> <http://www.russianaeros.com>www.russianaeros.com
>>> <http://www.russianaeros.com>
>>> Im currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local
>>> phone is +94 779 132 160.
>>> *
>>>
>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>
>> *
>>
>> ==================================
>> ef="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>> ==================================
>> ums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>> ==================================
>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>> ==================================
>>
>> *
> *
>
>
> *
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: | Percent RPM to Rpm help |
My CJ has always had a digital tach, a manifold pressure gauge in inches and airspeed
in MPH. (Makes for an interesting brief for formation flying)
Now I'm installing an M-14.
What are your recommendations for takeoff/climb/cruise power settings in Inches
and (actual)RPM?
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=327575#327575
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: GT Propellors |
No doubt of it. As Jill stated this need arose primarily due to a dearth of replacement
blades, and not so much responding to a need for better performance.
Having said this, the new offerings seem to be a step up in terms of balance and
finish quality. I would also point out that performance of the props (including
the three-blade MT) are surprisingly similar.
On Jan 19, 2011, at 10:36 AM, A. Dennis Savarese wrote:
>
> Now THAT's clearly one of the most intelligent comments on the subject of prop
blades I've heard. Thanks Doc for bringing me and probably some other folks
on the list back down to earth.
> Dennis
>
> A. Dennis Savarese
> 334-285-6263
> 334-546-8182 (cell)
> Skype: Yakguy1
> www.yak-52.com
>
> On 1/19/2011 9:06 AM, Roger Kemp M.D. wrote:
>> You know for the majority of us that are using our YAKs and CJs for
>> weekend attitude adjustment the superiority
>> Of which blade beats the other by 3 seconds is academic. Blades
>> separating at the hub, serviceability,static vs
>> Dynamic balance out of the box and overall safety of the blades are of
>> great interest. Expense of replacement
>> In this down turned economy is of greater interest. For those that need
>> to replace blades, cost,reliability, and serviceability are big issues.
>> How much damage to the M-14 do these new composite carbon fiber blades
>> do to the M-14 when landed gear up at idle throttle? The reliable v530
>> turns to saw dust without generally destroying the engine necessitating
>> an expensive engine replacement. Any data out there on that?
>> We YAK and CJ'ers are a cheap bunch you know?
>> ?^))
>> doc
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Jan 19, 2011, at 4:56 AM, Eric Wobschall <eric@buffaloskyline.com
>> <mailto:eric@buffaloskyline.com>> wrote:
>>
>>> Richard:
>>>
>>> I did find this data from Rick Volker, which I realize is anecdotal,
>>> but I think still useful and coming from someone who knows what he's
>>> doing:
>>>
>>>> Max level speed: mtv3=gt= v530=330kph
>>>> Mtv9 slower by 10 kph
>>>> Max cruise: mtv3=gt=v530=305kph
>>>> Mtv9 slower by 8 kph lia
>>>> Full power stall speed: V530=65 mph,mtv3=60 kph
>>>> Gt=50kph , MTV 9= < 50 kph(hovering possible)-below measurable airspeed
>>>> Vertical penetration from 6G pull,330kph:
>>>> V530=1600', mtv3=1700', GT=1700',Mtv9 00'
>>>> Time on vertical line: v530=17 second. Mtv3 second. GT
>>>> seconds.MTV 9= >30 second (hovering).
>>>> Time to climb 1000' to 2000': v530 second.
>>>> GT= 20 second., mtv3=17 second, mtv9=17 seconds.
>>>> Level acceleration full power, 200kph to 300kph:
>>>> V530= 17sec. GT= 17sec. Mtv3=15 sec.mtv9=16 second.
>>>> Descent rate at idle with prop at 100%rpm:
>>>> Mtv9 =15 sec/1000',GT=32sec/1000',v530=35sec/1000',mtv3= 40sec/1000'
>>>> Note: the MTV 9 has longer blades and was optimized for static
>>>> thrust. It stays much flatter power off, is significantly slower in
>>>> speed, but will hover this weight aircraft.
>>>> The GT has more static thrust than the MTV3 and more thrust from 0 to
>>>> 120kph. It loses to the mtv3 at 170kph Vy climb and at 200-300kph
>>>> acceleration, but has same top speed and cruise speed. The GT power
>>>> off descent rate is high, suggesting the blades stay very flat at
>>>> power off .
>>>> The GT was only static balanced and was much lower vibration than the
>>>> v530 which had been dynamic balanced. The MTV3 and MTV9 had been
>>>> dynamic balanced and were by far the smoothest props. It would be
>>>> conceivable that the GT would be smoother if dynamic balanced. The GT
>>>> may need a spinner with backing plate to allow dynamic balancing to
>>>> the same level as a three blade prop. GT is developing a carbon fiber
>>>> spinner that is 46 cm wide for the V530 hub.
>>>> Vertical penetration and time on vertical line upwards were equal
>>>> with mtv3 vs GT.
>>>> From these tests, the GT is as good as the mtv3-250 three blade prop
>>>> during aerobatics and may be as good an all around prop for
>>>> aerobatics, travel, and short field take offs. The mtv9-260-29 has
>>>> been optimized for aerobatics and air shows at the expense of slower
>>>> cruise, max speed, and poor glide characteristics. It would be
>>>> advisable to test the GT against the MTV9-250 with both the-27 and
>>>> -29 blades.
>>>> The GT is superior to the v530 in static thrust, vertical
>>>> penetration, power on stall, and vibration. It is equal in climb,
>>>> midspeed acceration,cruise,and top speed. The GT has a slightly worse
>>>> power off glide than the v530. There is also more propeller braking
>>>> with the GT than with the V530 on roll out after landing.
>>>
>>> On Jan 19, 2011, at 4:43 AM, Richard.Goode wrote:
>>>
>>>> From everything I have heard I suspect that the GT blades do give a
>>>> good advantage over the V-530 blades.But then the V-530 is a 50+ year
>>>> old design,so a new blade really SHOULD perform a lot better!
>>>> But when is someone going to produce proper scientific performance
>>>> figures comparing these different props,including MT,rather than
>>>> saying that"acceleration is much better",or similar subjective
>>>> assesments??
>>>> Richard Goode Aerobatics
>>>> Rhodds Farm
>>>> Lyonshall
>>>> Hereford
>>>> HR5 3LW
>>>> United Kingdom
>>>> Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
>>>> Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
>>>> <http://www.russianaeros.com>www.russianaeros.com
>>>> <http://www.russianaeros.com>
>>>> Im currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local
>>>> phone is +94 779 132 160.
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>>> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>> ==================================
>>> ef="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
>>> ==================================
>>> ums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>>> ==================================
>>> http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>> ==================================
>>>
>>> *
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>
>
>
>
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: Percent RPM to Rpm help |
I think this link will answer your questions.
http://www.yak-52.com/Power%20Settings.htm It's on my web site. To
convert the manifold pressure shown in chart in millimeters, multiply by
.0394. Basically, at WOT, an M14P at sea level on a standard day will
develop just about 35" of manifold pressure.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-285-6263
334-546-8182 (cell)
Skype: Yakguy1
www.yak-52.com
On 1/19/2011 10:18 AM, N642K wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "N642K"<mdecanio@mac.com>
>
> My CJ has always had a digital tach, a manifold pressure gauge in inches and
airspeed in MPH. (Makes for an interesting brief for formation flying)
>
> Now I'm installing an M-14.
>
> What are your recommendations for takeoff/climb/cruise power settings in Inches
and (actual)RPM?
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=327575#327575
>
>
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: Percent RPM to Rpm help |
That's it! FANTASTIC INFORMATION!. Thanks for your time Dennis!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=327582#327582
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: Percent RPM to Rpm help |
My pleasure.
Dennis
A. Dennis Savarese
334-285-6263
334-546-8182 (cell)
Skype: Yakguy1
www.yak-52.com
On 1/19/2011 11:02 AM, N642K wrote:
> --> Yak-List message posted by: "N642K"<mdecanio@mac.com>
>
> That's it! FANTASTIC INFORMATION!. Thanks for your time Dennis!
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=327582#327582
>
>
Message 17
| 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 |
|
Strong rumour suggests that this was the result of a birdstrike???
Chris.
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Olivier Vigneron
Sent: Wednesday, 19 January 2011 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: Yak-List: GT Propellors
I found something not so good about the GT Prop: http://gtpropellers.com/
Of course a problem is always a possibility but the AAIB's conclusions are
very bad:
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/bulletins/september_2009/speedtwin_st2__
g_stdl.cfm
Olivier
2011/1/19 Richard.Goode <richard.goode@russianaeros.com>
>From everything I have heard I suspect that the GT blades do give a good
advantage over the V-530 blades.But then the V-530 is a 50+ year old
design,so a new blade really SHOULD perform a lot better!
But when is someone going to produce proper scientific performance figures
comparing these different props,including MT,rather than saying
that"acceleration is much better",or similar subjective assesments??
Richard Goode Aerobatics
Rhodds Farm
Lyonshall
Hereford
HR5 3LW
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 1544 340120
Fax: +44 (0) 1544 340129
www.russianaeros.com
I'm currently in Sri Lanka but this Mail is working,and my local phone is
+94 779 132 160.
et="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Yak-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Message 18
| 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: GT Propellors |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Message 19
| 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: Cold weather oil woes |
For what's it worth:
My system, which may or may not have been Craig's (on the aircraft when I bought
it) but looked identical, failed in cold weather as well. My oil tank and sump
was heated, the oil cooler was not. When the cold oil came out of the cooler
and hit the filter housing it blew shearing the shaft the filter threads on
to.
The problem with using systems like this, especially in cold wx, is that they are
not designed for aircraft and the oils we use. They are meant to be used as
hydraulic oil filters.
The filter housing bypass is too small for the volume and viscosity of the oil
trying to pass through (if needed) and I suspect the filter construction and
size is not up to the task either.
I am thankful this happened on the ground.
I've since installed a ADC spin on system designed for radial engine aircraft (very
large bypass) and have placed a strip heater on my oil cooler. Additionally,
I will not move the throttle past 1200 rpm in cold weather until I have 20C.
Even better...I now have a heated hangar....
--------
Keith McKinley
700HS
KFIT
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=327625#327625
Message 20
| 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:RE: GT Propellors |
Remarkable! Same sorta experience I had with email to GT propellers rep named
"Humberto". Me no speakee english I guess.
Craig Payne
Message 21
| 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: Cold weather oil woes |
Keith, et al:
You bring up a number of points that I have commented on previously,
apparently to little avail.
First let me say I agree with your choice of filter systems.
I install only approved radial engine oil filter systems. My preference is
the original ADC screen type but the spin-on is fine. Have also installed
the Air Tractor spin-on which is also approved for the R985/R1340, etc.
The use of the term "radial" is not the defining description of these
aircraft approved systems. A better one may be a DRY SUMP engine of high oil
flow with an oil scavange pump system. Of course all radials fit this
description but so do certain inline types.
There is no point in installing an external oil filter unless it is located
to filter oil immediately on leaving the engine.
Scavange pump pressure is NOT regulated by a relief valve. Initial running
with very cold oil could produce pressures in excess of 300 psi.
Many cold weather radial installations utilize a "surge" valve to dump oil
directly to the tank. On the R1340/Harvard installation this opens at 85psi.
This is in addition to the normal oil cooler by-pass valve.
The hydraulic system, super micron, filters that some are using on their
engines have a miniscule capacity by-pass that opens at 15 psi. That
basically means that the by-pass probably spends as much time open as
closed.
Even with an open by-pass and cold oil there could be enough pressure to
collapse the filter.
IMHO they are a total waste of time and money and do not belong on an
aircraft engine.
FWIW
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "keithmckinley" <keith.mckinley@townisp.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 3:58 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Cold weather oil woes
> <keith.mckinley@townisp.com>
>
> For what's it worth:
>
> My system, which may or may not have been Craig's (on the aircraft when I
> bought it) but looked identical, failed in cold weather as well. My oil
> tank and sump was heated, the oil cooler was not. When the cold oil came
> out of the cooler and hit the filter housing it blew shearing the shaft
> the filter threads on to.
>
> The problem with using systems like this, especially in cold wx, is that
> they are not designed for aircraft and the oils we use. They are meant to
> be used as hydraulic oil filters.
>
> The filter housing bypass is too small for the volume and viscosity of
> the oil trying to pass through (if needed) and I suspect the filter
> construction and size is not up to the task either.
>
> I am thankful this happened on the ground.
>
> I've since installed a ADC spin on system designed for radial engine
> aircraft (very large bypass) and have placed a strip heater on my oil
> cooler. Additionally, I will not move the throttle past 1200 rpm in cold
> weather until I have 20C.
>
> Even better...I now have a heated hangar....
>
> --------
> Keith McKinley
> 700HS
> KFIT
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=327625#327625
>
>
>
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! --
|