Return-Path: Received: from m04.lax.untd.com ([64.136.30.67] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with SMTP id 3115162 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:12:22 -0500 Received: from cookie.untd.com by cookie.untd.com for <"gV9QSHkwPVsgW65a6QxQH0CG3IuoFPYdPd7l7zE3T80=">; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 06:12:09 PST Received: (from lm4@juno.com) by m04.lax.untd.com (jqueuemail) id JREP34J5; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 06:12:09 PST To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:10:35 -0500 Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] C mounting on a B plate?? Renesis & RD-1C drivetesting Message-ID: <20040323.091045.-37241203.1.lm4@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Juno-Att: 0 X-Juno-RefParts: 0 From: lm4@juno.com John Rontz On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 02:14:57 +0000 kenpowell@comcast.net writes: > I hate to tell you guys 'I told you so, but...'. An't the 2.85 ratio > great! Congradulations Tracy on your results so far. I have also > been preaching the benefits of peripheral ports, but to no avail. > And since it doesn't look like I am going to get an airplane built > anytime soon, it looks like someone else will have to prove the > superiority of the PP. Of course, the Renesis will probably prove > superior to the PP so this may not matter. Tracy, BTW my prop > program (written by the guy that did the RV-9 wing, I can't seem to > remember his name at the moment) calculated a 91 pitch for a 72" > diameter. Close to yours but I realize that there alot of other > factors as well. > > Ken Powell