Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To: lml
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 04:01:44 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1338518@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=206.123.212.134; envelope-from=aflyer@lazy8.net
From: John Huft <aflyer@lazy8.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Prop for Legacy
References: <list-1337703@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-1337703@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Alan K. Adamson wrote:
> Ok, all, great info... Let me share a bit more after some digging.
>  
>  
> Ok, on to the MT topic.  I just got off the phone with MT.  Here's the 
> scoop.  There is *NO* new airfoil on the blades, they have been a 
> scimitar design from the beginning (whenever that was).  The *DID* 
> however come out with a counterweighted prop last year, but it's the 
> same blade design, with the counterweights added at the bladeholder.
>  
> 
>  
> So, to really put all of this in perspective, we'd need a Legacy that 
> has flown with the Hartzell at a known configuration, and with the MT in 
> the same configuration.  I'm not sure we're going to make that happen, 
> so I guess we are back to ground zero.
>  

Well, how about on a slow speed RV8?

http://lazy8.net/proptest.htm

John