FYI, Virg

Hi Rene,
Just wondering if the guys over Kr-net do any pull test and compare

numbers

with each other to kind of establish a workable prop/h.p. range? Last

week
i

saw a guy testing is 601 with a couple of pulleys, a rope and an oil

cylinder

with a pressure gage attached to it. He tied one pulley on the back of

his

machine, the other to a secure tiedown point and he floored it. He got

a

reading of 350 lbs. He told me that the contraption was passed down

from
owner

to owner in the region so as to build a data base for comparison from

witch

they could draw educated guess about their set up.Any ideas???

The danger in  putting too much emphasis on static thrust is
you can under pitch your prop and when it comes time to fly the HP
will not be there. Happened to a guy down in Phoenix about
a year ago.

Paul Lamar

 The gentlman from SWAG automotive apparently did that very thing a year or
so ago.  Had a Long EZ with a GEO engine.  Manufacture of the adjustable
prop reportedly calculated that with the pitch (or rather lack thereof) the
aircraft would have probably not exceeded approx 70 MPH.  Apparently flew it
off in ground effect and never gained altitude - impacted some cactus and
burned.  The small pitch setting gave gobs of static rpm and HP but as Paul
pointed out very little thrust.

Ed Anderson

 
The AirCraft Rotary Engine NewsLetter.              Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org