|
Jim Sower wrote:
Yeah. Also, I
believe Tracy has answered all of his "questions" around
tortionals and props and dynos. Additionally, if there were problems,
Tracy would have encountered one in 1500 hrs.
The guy's statement around "... sprag clutches cause the prop to
freewheel
in the event of engine failure putting the equivalent of a barn door
(HUGE
drag compared to stopped prop) behind the airplane ..." is so
preposterous
that it calls ALL of his other engineering into question.
Not so fast, Jim ....
A widmilling prop DOES have hugh drag compared to a stopped one. An
unfeatherable, windmilling prop almost had me swimming in the Pacific
Ocean near Wake Island many years ago. The fact that the engine seized
when a piston could no longer reciprocate inside a missing cylinder
...was what saved my bacon. Once it stopped, even though the props'
blade angle was nowhere near feathered, the drag reduction was so
dramatic that we were able to level off from a forced descent and keep
the ship (a C-123B) in the air long enough to make it to destination on
the other engine.
When you think windmilling drag ... think prop circle area, not just
the blades cross section themselves. Square yards of drag, not square
ft.
His article
sounds authoritative, but has all the intellectual allure of Lamar's
rantings
that NACA ducts and Electric Water Pumps "... cannot possibly work
...".
Stick with Tracy. He has something flying. This guy has nada.
I tend to like Tracy's solution also. His hours in the air give him a
lot of credibility.
Just a theory .... Jim S.
David Leonard wrote:
Dale Smith
|
|