X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from lrcmmta07-srv.windstream.net ([166.102.165.79] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.2) with ESMTP id 4118445 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:28:03 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=166.102.165.79; envelope-from=montyr2157@windstream.net Return-Path: X-WS-COS: WSOB804 X-Cloudmark-Category: Undefined:Undefined X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=3r2JSgKf3DAWF1UyVYlmnXPdxOhsc0knMSxBREytudE= c=1 sm=0 a=_lZFVVS9x50A:10 a=PLxZVZIgIvw2wTp86sUA:9 a=uyMpjrN5dnNcBkzBfE7fN1FJfPYA:4 a=Hl1Gy0H5AAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=yWsuZ0oKq3rSgGCTrrgA:9 a=79o7pxEXeDKOBQpv60wA:7 a=eZK5jN3fa5UmhzJd9W__OSshK1EA:4 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=/BCh3og2hsim97HtmUyo0A==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 Authentication-Results: lrcmmta07 smtp.user=montyr2157; auth=pass (LOGIN) Received: from [98.20.208.27] ([98.20.208.27:60276] helo=newbox) by lrcmmta07 (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.2.45 r()) with ESMTPA id 0B/CB-16596-F6DF17B4; Tue, 09 Feb 2010 18:27:27 -0600 Message-ID: <7AED3BEA577C4EB69D0DC1B19D81635B@newbox> From: "MONTY ROBERTS" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: rpm vs Power was : Throttle limits was Re: N.A. Renesis to turbo Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 18:27:18 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_011F_01CAA9B5.82FD8D30" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_011F_01CAA9B5.82FD8D30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Don't listen to whoever told you that George. It is application = specific. You design it for what you are doing. Each design has an = optimum point and it's worse everywhere else. All you can do is move it = around. I can't give specific advice...precisely because of all the variables. = If you were paying me to design one, I would call Craig Catto. ;-) Monty ----- Original Message -----=20 From: George Lendich=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 6:07 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: rpm vs Power was : Throttle limits was Re: = N.A. Renesis to turbo Monty, Prop efficiency climbs (so I'm told) until it reaches speed of sound, = so I believe some try to take the prop as close to 3,000 rpm as = possible, yet some stay a conservative 2,700 rpm, what do you suggest, = given all the variables. George (down under) ------=_NextPart_000_011F_01CAA9B5.82FD8D30 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Don't listen to whoever told you that = George. It is=20 application specific. You design it for what you are doing. Each=20 design has an optimum point and it's worse everywhere else. All you = can do=20 is move it around.
 
I can't give specific = advice...precisely because of=20 all the variables. If you were paying me to design one, I would = call Craig=20 Catto. ;-)
 
Monty
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 George=20 Lendich
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, = 2010 6:07=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: rpm vs = Power was=20 : Throttle limits was Re: N.A. Renesis to turbo

Monty,
Prop efficiency climbs (so I'm told) = until it=20 reaches speed of sound, so I believe some try to take the prop  = as close=20 to 3,000 rpm as possible, yet some stay a conservative 2,700 rpm, what = do you=20 suggest, given all the variables.
George (down under)
  ------=_NextPart_000_011F_01CAA9B5.82FD8D30--