X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 22:55:43 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mis005-2.exch005intermedia.net ([64.78.61.113] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.8) with ESMTP id 3131248 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:23:50 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.78.61.113; envelope-from=johnwcox@pacificnw.com Received: from EXVBE005-2.exch005intermedia.net ([10.254.1.74]) by mis005-2.exch005intermedia.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 13 Sep 2008 20:23:13 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C91619.386F4BAF" Subject: RE: [LML] Constant Speed Prop for IO-360 X-Original-Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 20:23:13 -0700 X-Original-Message-ID: <683D1C47989E0E42AB0422DC615861EF098DAE@EXVBE005-2.exch005intermedia.net> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [LML] Constant Speed Prop for IO-360 Thread-Index: AckWGE3a3oQwFKk/QM+grArQKMxztwAAQENA References: From: "John Cox" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" X-Original-Return-Path: johnwcox@pacificnw.com X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Sep 2008 03:23:13.0391 (UTC) FILETIME=[38744FF0:01C91619] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C91619.386F4BAF Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The three blade Second Generation Hartzell composite is being test flown on Rob Hickman - Advanced Flight Systems RV-10 aircraft. He also has the same blades on his two blade RV-4. Cirrus and Mooney have it now in GA production. VANS said the price might be in the $14,000 range. So, if Joe is willing to offer the option ask the factory. =20 John Cox =20 From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Jeremy Fisher Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2008 8:17 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Constant Speed Prop for IO-360 =20 I am at the interesting but expensive stage of buying a prop for the IO-360 engine in my 360. I would be interested in hearing views as to the optimum prop. I have seen and flown in 360s with the standard Hartzell 2 blade 68" metal prop, and know of the MT 3 blade composite. I have heard rumors that Hartzell is also developing a 3 blade composite unit. Much as I might admire the Aerocomposites prop, it is outside my budget, and I know that the Whirlwind 151 props have a poor in-service history. I would like to get some inputs as to which props people are using and what their opinions are. I would be particularly keen to hear from anyone with comparative experience, ideally with data. Apart from the usual requirements of cruise efficiency, especially at higher altitudes, I also will eventually be operating off a relatively short strip, so take off performance is a significant factor. I would appreciate any and all inputs. Thanks. Jerry Fisher ------_=_NextPart_001_01C91619.386F4BAF Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The three blade Second Generation Hartzell composite is = being test flown on Rob Hickman - Advanced Flight Systems RV-10 = aircraft. He also has the same blades on his two blade RV-4. Cirrus and Mooney = have it now in GA production. VANS said the price might be in the $14,000 = range. So, if Joe is willing to offer the option ask the = factory.

John Cox

From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Jeremy Fisher
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2008 8:17 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Constant Speed Prop for = IO-360

I am at the interesting = but expensive stage of buying a prop for the IO-360 engine in my 360. = I would be interested in hearing views as to the optimum prop. I have seen = and flown in 360s with the standard Hartzell 2 blade 68" metal prop, = and know of the MT 3 blade composite. I have heard rumors that Hartzell is = also developing a 3 blade composite unit. Much as I might admire the Aerocomposites prop, it is outside my budget, and I know that the = Whirlwind 151 props have a poor in-service history.

I would like to get some inputs as to which props people are using and = what their opinions are. I would be particularly keen to hear from = anyone with comparative experience, ideally with data. Apart from the usual requirements of cruise efficiency, especially at higher altitudes, I = also will eventually be operating off a relatively short strip, so take off = performance is a significant factor.

I would appreciate any and all inputs. Thanks.

Jerry Fisher

------_=_NextPart_001_01C91619.386F4BAF--