Larry: you're absolutely correct, of course... I erroneously plugged in the
prop length instead of the pitch. Makes me feel much better to know that my
prop is running at a very respectable 84% efficiency ;o)
Wheel pants? I know who wears the pants in my family, and it ain't my Air
Camper ;o)
The KR is certainly an efficient airframe with an efficient airfoil. If I run
the same efficienty calc as Larry ran, using my Continental A75 turning 2450
RPM (redline is 2600) turning my 72x36 Culver prop, theoretical 100% efficiency
would move the airplane through the air at 167 MPH. I'm jus
I've always admired the craftsmanship involved in attaching the copper
protective strips to the leading edges. Also the curves of the design.
They do look heavy . . . something at least befitting a Corvair or more
powerful engine than the typical VW derivative. Lightness is an advantage I
s
Posting this for Pete,
This might be a good prop for you O-200 guys. Its a Sensenich 56x54 if his
memory serves him. He flew it for 30 minutes and took it off as it was too much
prop for his right hand turning Corvair. He is looking for somewhere around
$500 for it. Please send me an email off
: "Orma"
To: "KRnet"
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 6:04 PM
Subject: Re: KR> Sensenich prop
> I looked at Mark J's numbers and it is as you say. Mark has a Sturba
54x54
> and turns a max of 3200 also and yet his speed is 148. The only
difference
> that
Orma wrote:
> What size is the new prop
54 x 54, but their numbers apparently bear little relationship to Sterba's
numbers...
Mark Langford, Huntsville, Alabama
see KR2S project N56ML at http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford
email to N56ML "at" hiwaay.net
-
I looked at Mark J's numbers and it is as you say. Mark has a Sturba 54x54
and turns a max of 3200 also and yet his speed is 148. The only difference
that I see is that you and your plane are lighter. (Please don't shoot me
Mark) If you were to add the extra weight do think the numbers w
7 matches
Mail list logo
