X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 21:52:12 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from wind.imbris.com ([216.18.130.7] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0c1) with ESMTPS id 668038 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 13 Aug 2005 11:24:32 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.18.130.7; envelope-from=brent@regandesigns.com Received: from [192.168.1.100] (wireless-216-18-135-19.imbris.com [216.18.135.19]) (authenticated bits=0) by wind.imbris.com (8.12.11/8.12.11.S) with ESMTP id j7DFNgo5000709; Sat, 13 Aug 2005 08:23:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from brent@regandesigns.com) X-Original-Message-ID: <42FE1078.8070901@regandesigns.com> X-Original-Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 08:23:36 -0700 From: Brent Regan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-To: Michael Smith , Lancair Mailing List Subject: Re: [LML] Torqued to death References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010201020302010608070304" X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.86.1, clamav-milter version 0.86 on wind.imbris.com X-Virus-Status: Clean This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010201020302010608070304 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Michael: To answer your questions: Yes, every action requires a reaction. No, it is canted for P-Factor which is the yaw produced by the prop having a different left to right thrust when its axis of rotation is not vertically aligned with the direction of flight (as in a climb). Each wing is already lifting ~1800 lbs so another 10% isn't huge at normal flight speeds. After all, if you pull 5 Gs you are increasing the loading by 500%. It is the extra 10% at low speeds, at or near stall, that could mess you up. That is my theory, I could be wrong. It would be enlightening to have a turbine pilot's views and experiences (at a safe altitude) on this topic. Regards Brent Regan Michael Smith wrote: > > > Brent, > > > > Is that really true? Isn't the turbine canted like a piston install > to compensate for torque? I am not discounting the torque issue > entirely, but that much torque would have huge airframe implications > even in the steady state configuration. > > > > Michael Smith > > > > > > Given the 745 available horsepower (near sea level) and the 2,067 RPM > prop speed I calculated an engine reaction torque of 1,893 foot > pounds, roughly the same as putting a 200 pound weight about mid span > on the aileron > --------------010201020302010608070304 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Michael:

To answer your questions:

Yes, every action requires a reaction.
No, it is canted for P-Factor which is the yaw produced by the prop having a different left to right thrust when its axis of rotation is not vertically aligned with the direction of flight (as in a climb).

Each wing is already lifting ~1800 lbs so another 10% isn't huge at normal flight speeds. After all, if you pull 5 Gs you are increasing the loading by 500%. It is the extra 10% at low speeds, at or near stall, that could mess you up.

That is my theory, I could be wrong. It would be enlightening to have a turbine pilot's views and experiences (at a safe altitude) on this topic.

Regards
Brent Regan

Michael Smith wrote:

Brent,

Is that really true? Isn't the turbine canted like a piston install to compensate for torque? I am not discounting the torque issue entirely, but that much torque would have huge airframe implications even in the steady state configuration.

Michael Smith

Given the 745 available horsepower (near sea level) and the 2,067 RPM prop speed I calculated an engine reaction torque of 1,893 foot pounds, roughly the same as putting a 200 pound weight about mid span on the aileron

--------------010201020302010608070304--