When we originally started selling the Arplast VP prop we agreed with the
PFA that.
1) with the prop set fine the engine should not exceed max rpm in the
initial part of the climb (without pilot input).
2) with the prop set course the aircraft must be able to make a go around
and establish a climb from a normal approach condition.
3) the engine should not overspeed in a Vne decent with throttle at idle and
prop set course. (although this condition does not appear critical on the
Rotax with gear reduction)
I will be seeking a clarification on the fine limit now that I am using a
constant speed controller but I assume the fine limit can be finer as the
controller ensures max rpm is not exceeded without pilot input.
During testing on my own aircraft I found the course limit to give a safe go
around was far courser than I needed for normal fast cruise.
Jerry
Jerry@ban-bi.com or LTS@avnet.co.uk
www.Ban-bi.com or www.avnet.co.uk/touchdown
----- Original Message -----
From: "R.C.Harrison" <ptag.dev@ukonline.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [Flying] Best Glide
> Hi! Guys.
> I would just like to put a penny's worth in here..... IMHO when using a VP
> propeller it's most coarse setting should be the minimum "GO ROUND"
setting
> in the event of system failure. It also follows conversly that a fully
> fethered propeller (that is maximum fine for best glide) should not be
> beyond a "Go round " either ?
> Sorry if I'm stating the obvious!
> Regards
> Bob Harrison G-PTAG Europa MKI 337 /Jabiru 3300/ MT Constant Speed
> Propeller.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: forum-owner@europaclub.org.uk
> Cc: forum@europaclub.org.uk
> Subject: Fw: [Flying] Best Glide
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: david joyce <davidjoyce@beeb.net>
> Subject: Fw: [Flying] Best Glide
>
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: david joyce <davidjoyce@beeb.net>
> > Subject: Re: [Flying] Best Glide
> >
> >
> > > Tony, The other side of this particular coin is slowing down when you
> > reach
> > > you paddock. No doubt everyone with any sort of VP prop has noticed
what
> > an
> > > extraordinary difference it makes to your ability to slow down and get
> > onto
> > > the ground whether your prop is fully fine or fully coarse. Landing
> with
> > a
> > > feathered prop must be a bit like landing a glider without airbrakes -
> > > liable to make a large hole in the far fence of the paddock! I am not
> > > against feathering props but would be hesitant to use one in almost
any
> > case
> > > of engine failure in this country where you are lucky to find a field
> 400
> > > yds long. Regards, David
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Tony S. Krzyzewski <tonyk@kaon.co.nz>
> > > Subject: [Flying] Best Glide
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Yesterday we did some glide testing on ZK-UBD and ended up with some
> > > > rather interesting results. Remember that ZK-UBD is a Classic
> monowheel,
> > > > has no fairings, and that all the tests were being performed at
MAUW.
> > > > We were able to repeatedly show that the rate of descent improved by
> > > > around 90% when we feathered the prop compared with the engine just
> > > > idling across a wide range of speeds. On ZK-UDB we ended up with a
> best
> > > > glide speed of 70 knots IAS at 520fpm with the prop feathered. With
> the
> > > > engine idling the rate of descent at 70kias was 1100 fpm.
> > > >
> > > > For those with Airmaster featherable controllers this is worth
> > > > remembering if you ever have an engine failure. It may mean the
> > > > difference between reaching that paddock and not reaching it!
> > > >
> > > > Tony
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The Europa Forum is supported by Aviators Network UK
> <info@avnet.co.uk>
> > >
> >
>
>
|