X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 07:46:25 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from nm19-vm0.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([66.94.236.25] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.5) with ESMTPS id 6340761 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:26:46 -0400 Received-SPF: neutral receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.94.236.25; envelope-from=craig@skybolt.net Received: from [66.94.237.200] by nm19.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Jun 2013 22:26:05 -0000 Received: from [98.139.221.54] by tm11.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Jun 2013 22:26:05 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp107.sbc.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 19 Jun 2013 22:26:05 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 180690.24931.bm@smtp107.sbc.mail.bf1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: pU5JTdgVM1nOaxwOZ_T_gP_0yJqsfj4v2SrZF84cCghzPP8 .2k7eW2xs8QfEdqdBeFxjxQjZ2rUZ3AyFMkStb5H9BT693UVcJ9QpAi5zsas jeljsm1kvB3Ck7.2uJ4yt7lYRdT3gkYMh92GQNC0UhyHAhcdqLn9DF8kxVvm 0l6NptPRJjo.Mw6K8hzuVP6wmV6IdP1Bx8EWbqrSO6A3kOXg3bQJAwG3IES1 YJsuxx5bawclWgkQd3w8MzgMOm7SaP2nN_qqO_SW0Di5wCR06rp6izWL0dlg zJ2tWV9hTOrVToI9WJJ68D5IXamBHQyYLkyCYFgxBqcRbCpnxrf.KC79fOg8 o2x0xJyVDBscf0YAiUVJ_Aqx9nuF_HCJud2Ptfm6hMuRZ7A33MzAQnFqzO5R aXjv5qU1djEenJXM_7QpGN3Lt4Ltmh8V1yAVMvLbwIcoSq4DYCS2yht_yb79 P4AkrUkI7oRU1sKXGT4FT2kUldM4RpY7wQ9Esb6l3YdUDsrzL2uW7iuGEKw9 g4MgMu9XtO7arrEH9uU.9Gb08hMqxuq.hvLbjiLi9sNosTXGl.kY4zitiFQK JFwcQoEAdE0JkHV566rMDUwUGZ9zjp56SJQejrgZ. X-Yahoo-SMTP: sYxhbm.swBCvFXZ5XcsZWT3w2320TvMaw69nMUmH X-Rocket-Received: from CraigSchulzePC (craig@64.168.166.45 with login) by smtp107.sbc.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 19 Jun 2013 15:26:05 -0700 PDT Reply-To: From: "Craig" X-Original-To: "'Nick Long'" , References: In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [LML] Re: Propeller choice for Lancair 320 and Back Plate failures X-Original-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:26:00 -0700 Organization: Skybolt X-Original-Message-ID: <012d01ce6d3b$fb8887d0$f2999770$@net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_012E_01CE6D01.4F29AFD0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Ac5sZr1gLj8I7E6OQZCEXJ6xQl+zVwA0cA5g Content-Language: en-us This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_012E_01CE6D01.4F29AFD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Nick and Dan, =20 My 320 had the F8468D prop and I will have to say that it was a very = efficient prop. It always ran very well along side all my friends with = 360 motors. Back in November my nose gear dipped into a pot hole and I = had a prop strike. As a result I ended up upgrading to a 360 and to a = new blade design. The blade I am using now is a F7694 with a D twist. = It was a SR-20 blade that I had twisted for the higher speeds of the = Lancair. The combination added apx 12 kts. It doesn=E2=80=99t feel = like it climbs as well but it sure scoots on the level. While waiting = for my motor I did some research and was able to get the engineers of = Hartzell to give me some calculations on the various props for = comparison purposes. Note that they did not want the F8468D used on a = 360. As you can see it was the best blade. The blade I went with = however is not on this list. The blade they favor is the F7497D. It = has very recently been approved by them for use on the Lancair 360. You = will see it on the Lancair website too. =20 =20 These calculations below were provided to me from Hartzell. =20 =20 7497-2, 199 lbs thrust, 84.6% 7497D-2, 206 lbs thrust, 87.8% 7666-4, 191 lbs thrust, 81.3% 7068-2, 206 lbs thrust 87.8% 8468D-14, 208 lbs, 88.5% 320 motors only =20 At 4500 ft 75 degrees 2700 rpm I am getting 215 kts true with the new = 360 motor and prop. The old 320 did about 203 under similar = circumstances. =20 Blue Skies, Craig Schulze Lancair N73S =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 From: Nick Long [mailto:nick@beaglepup.info]=20 Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 2:00 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Propeller choice for Lancair 320 and Back Plate = failures =20 Thanks Dan, =20 That=E2=80=99s all useful info. At first, one would be tempted to say = that 3-4 knots is not significant, but if it is repeatable.... I remember years ago some of us wondering why one aircraft was faster = than another and swapping supposedly identical props between supposedly = identical aircraft, then flying in formation and finding one prop was = always 3 or 4 knots better. =20 Nick =20 =20 From: Dan & Kari Olsen=20 Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 6:47 PM To: lml@lancaironline.net=20 Subject: [LML] Re: Propeller choice for Lancair 320 and Back Plate = failures =20 Nick, =20 I=E2=80=99ve got a Lancair 320 with the IO-320-D1B 160hp engine and the = Hartzell 70=E2=80=9D prop that Lancair and Hartzell approved for this = airframe and engine. I=E2=80=99m very pleased with the performance. A = friend of mine has the same airframe and engine as I do but has the MT = 3-blade prop. When we fly formation at exactly the same power settings, = I am pulling away from him at about 3-4kts. We haven=E2=80=99t tried a = side-by-side climb comparison but the 2-blade Hartzell is definitely a = bit faster in cruise than the 3-blade Hartzell, just as prop theory = would suggest. =20 When I built the plane I was concerned about spinner wobble and = stresses, so I created a little donut inside the spinner that fits = snugly around the prop hub. You can see a photo of it here: = http://lancair.net/pix/olsen/olsen-construction. After 720hrs on the = airplane I have had no problems with spinner or cracking. =20 Cheers! =20 Dan Olsen Fort Collins, CO N320DK, 320 MKII, 720hrs N630DK, IV-P, 20% complete =20 =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_012E_01CE6D01.4F29AFD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Nick and = Dan,

 

My 320 had the F8468D = prop and I will have to say that it was a very efficient prop.=C2=A0 It always ran = very well along side all my friends with 360 motors.=C2=A0 Back in November my = nose gear dipped into a pot hole and I had a prop strike.=C2=A0 As a result I = ended up upgrading to a 360 and to a new blade design. The blade I am using now = is a F7694 with a D twist.=C2=A0 It was a SR-20 blade that I had twisted for = the higher speeds of the Lancair.=C2=A0 The combination added apx 12 kts.=C2=A0 It = doesn=E2=80=99t feel like it climbs as well but it sure scoots on the level.=C2=A0 While waiting = for my motor I did some research and =C2=A0was able to get the engineers of Hartzell = to give me some calculations on the various props for comparison purposes.=C2=A0 = Note that they did not want the F8468D used on a 360.=C2=A0 As you can see it was the = best blade.=C2=A0 The blade I went with however is not on this list.=C2=A0 The blade they = favor is the F7497D.=C2=A0 It has very recently been approved by them for use on the = Lancair 360.=C2=A0 You will see it on the Lancair website too.=C2=A0

 

These calculations = below were provided to me from Hartzell.

 

 

7497-2,   = 199 lbs thrust,  84.6%

7497D-2,  206 = lbs thrust, 87.8%

7666-4, 191 lbs = thrust, 81.3%

7068-2, 206 lbs = thrust 87.8%

8468D-14, 208 lbs, = 88.5%=C2=A0 320 motors only

 

At 4500 ft 75 degrees = 2700 rpm I am getting 215 kts true with the new 360 motor and prop.=C2=A0 The old = 320 did about 203 under similar circumstances.

 

Blue = Skies,

Craig = Schulze

Lancair = N73S

 

 

 

 

 

From:= Nick Long [mailto:nick@beaglepup.info]
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 2:00 PM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Propeller choice for Lancair 320 and Back = Plate failures

 

Thanks = Dan,

 

That=E2=80=99s all useful info. At first, one would be tempted to say that 3-4 knots is not = significant, but if it is repeatable....

I = remember years ago some of us wondering why one aircraft was faster than another and = swapping supposedly identical props between supposedly identical aircraft, then = flying in formation and finding one prop was always 3 or 4 knots = better.

 

Nick

 

 

Sent:= Tuesday, June 18, 2013 6:47 PM

Subject:= = [LML] Re: Propeller choice for Lancair 320 and Back Plate = failures

 

Nick,

 

I=E2=80=99ve got a = Lancair 320 with the IO-320-D1B 160hp engine and the Hartzell 70=E2=80=9D prop that Lancair = and Hartzell approved for this airframe and engine.  I=E2=80=99m very pleased = with the performance.  A friend of mine has the same airframe and engine as = I do but has the MT 3-blade prop.  When we fly formation at exactly the = same power settings, I am pulling away from him at about 3-4kts.  We = haven=E2=80=99t tried a side-by-side climb comparison but the 2-blade Hartzell is = definitely a bit faster in cruise than the 3-blade Hartzell, just as prop theory = would suggest.

 

When I built the plane = I was concerned about spinner wobble and stresses, so I created a little donut = inside the spinner that fits snugly around the prop hub.  You can see a = photo of it here: http://lancair.n= et/pix/olsen/olsen-construction.  After 720hrs on the airplane I have had no problems with spinner or = cracking.

 

Cheers!

 

Dan = Olsen

Fort Collins, = CO

N320DK, 320 MKII, = 720hrs

N630DK, IV-P, 20% = complete

 

 

 

------=_NextPart_000_012E_01CE6D01.4F29AFD0--