X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 13:30:22 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imr-ma04.mx.aol.com ([64.12.206.42] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.1) with ESMTP id 6031791 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 27 Jan 2013 12:10:34 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.206.42; envelope-from=rogg@aol.com Received: from mtaout-ma06.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaout-ma06.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.41.6]) by imr-ma04.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 981901C000191 for ; Sun, 27 Jan 2013 12:10:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.104] (adsl-76-232-10-100.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net [76.232.10.100]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mtaout-ma06.r1000.mx.aol.com (MUA/Third Party Client Interface) with ESMTPSA id 06119E0000A4 for ; Sun, 27 Jan 2013 12:10:00 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Prop efficiency -- Hartzell References: From: Richard Ogg Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-08F3F1FA-3BAC-4ABB-BAE7-37C0C90DDA92 X-Mailer: iPad Mail (10A523) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Message-Id: X-Original-Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 09:10:00 -0800 X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:372179360:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d290651055f671011 X-AOL-IP: 76.232.10.100 --Apple-Mail-08F3F1FA-3BAC-4ABB-BAE7-37C0C90DDA92 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Is the hartzell legacy prop the same diameter for the lycoming as the contin= ental. I believe the lycoming installation is 2" higher than the continental= in the legacy. Sent from My rock pad and chisel On Jan 27, 2013, at 3:59 AM, Paul Miller wrote: > Regarding efficiency. You probably know our Legacy prop is cut back 3 inc= hes in diameter from the original full size Hartzell blade for nose clearanc= e. The guys here at Spruce have switched their SX300 (Swearingen) to the Ha= rtzell Legacy prop but uncut--so they get the extra 3 inches in diameter. S= ome are running the IO540, some IO580. The Hartzell is getting those guys a= n extra 5-7 knots and possibly more versus the non-Legacy prop. >=20 > I am told by the fellow doing some of the testing for Hartzell that if the= Legacy had the extra 3 inches diameter we would also benefit. I don't know= the figure. I don't know if it would be more than flap hinge redesigns (r= ead: fairings for us low IQs) but the question that comes to mind: What fact= ors have to be considered for a 3 inch larger diameter Legacy prop? =20 >=20 > Some things that come to mind: > 1) Hartzell approval > 2) prop clearance with flat strut and tire (not enough now for a larger pr= op) > 3) dynamics--how do the flight characteristics change and would tests be r= equired > 4) Is there a benefit >=20 > Feel free to start a new thread if someone has thoughts. >=20 > Paul > Legacy >=20 >=20 > On 2013-01-26, at 2:24 PM, vtailjeff@aol.com wrote: >=20 >> Charley, >>=20 >> I would like that! >>=20 >> Jeff >>=20 >> Sent from my iPad >>=20 >> On Jan 26, 2013, at 1:07 AM, Charles Brown wrote: >>=20 >>> I have Hartzell's efficiency analysis for their 3-blade and 2-blade prop= s for the Legacy / IO550, if anyone's interested. (I suspect that they woul= d apply equally to any airframe and engine combination). >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On Jan 25, 2013, at 1:32 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote: >>>=20 >>> Fred, >>>=20 >>> I have never been great at reading graphs, but the diagonal line is airs= peed, not HP corrected for prop efficiency. That is the vertical line. Or a= m I wrong?? >>>=20 >>> How do you do this if you have an alternative engine and have no idea of= what your HP is? It seems that you are guessing about the prop efficiency a= nd I would have to do the same for HP. Perhaps if someone gets a FP drag nu= mber for the Lancair Legacy FG, I could work backwards and find the HP? >>>=20 >>> Bill >>>=20 >>>=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-08F3F1FA-3BAC-4ABB-BAE7-37C0C90DDA92 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Is the hartzell legacy prop the s= ame diameter for the lycoming as the continental. I believe the lycoming ins= tallation is 2" higher than the continental in the legacy.

Sen= t from My rock pad and chisel



On= Jan 27, 2013, at 3:59 AM, Paul Miller <pjdmiller@gmail.com> wrote:

Regarding efficiency.  You probably know our Legacy prop is cut= back 3 inches in diameter from the original full size Hartzell blade for no= se clearance.  The guys here at Spruce have switched their SX300 (Swear= ingen) to the Hartzell Legacy prop but uncut--so they get the extra 3 inches= in diameter.   Some are running the IO540, some IO580.   The Hart= zell is getting those guys an extra 5-7 knots and possibly more versus the n= on-Legacy prop.

I am told by the fellow doing some of the= testing for Hartzell that if the Legacy had the extra 3 inches diameter we w= ould also benefit.  I don't know the figure.   I don't know if it w= ould be more than flap hinge redesigns (read: fairings for us low IQs) but t= he question that comes to mind: What factors have to be considered for a 3 i= nch larger diameter Legacy prop?  

Some things= that come to mind:
1) Hartzell approval
2) prop clearan= ce with flat strut and tire (not enough now for a larger prop)
3) d= ynamics--how do the flight characteristics change and would tests be require= d
4) Is there a benefit

Feel free to star= t a new thread if someone has thoughts.

Paul
<= div>Legacy


On 2013-01-26, at 2:24 PM,= vtailjeff@aol.com wrote:

Charley,

I would like that!

Jeff

Sent from my iPad

On Jan 26, 2013= , at 1:07 AM, Charles Brown <brow= ncc1@verizon.net> wrote:

I have Hartzell's efficiency analysis for their 3-blade and 2-bla= de props for the Legacy / IO550, if anyone's interested.  (I suspect th= at they would apply equally to any airframe and engine combination).


On Jan 25, 2013, at 1:32 PM, Bill Bradburry wrote= :

=

Fred,

I have never been great at reading grap= hs, but the diagonal line is airspeed, not HP corrected for prop efficiency.&nbs= p; That is the vertical line. Or am I wrong??

How do you do this if you have an alternative engine and have no idea of what your HP is?  It seems that y= ou are guessing about the prop efficiency and I would have to do the same for HP.&n= bsp; Perhaps if someone gets a FP drag number for the Lancair Legacy FG, I could work backwards and find the HP?

Bill



= --Apple-Mail-08F3F1FA-3BAC-4ABB-BAE7-37C0C90DDA92--