X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 09:18:12 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-m21.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.2] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.10) with ESMTP id 3303320 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 16 Nov 2008 20:08:46 -0500 Received: from Sky2high@aol.com by imo-m21.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v39.1.) id q.c88.3ac0ec7d (41809) for ; Sun, 16 Nov 2008 20:08:40 -0500 (EST) From: Sky2high@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2008 20:08:40 EST Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Prop Length for 360 X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1226884120" X-Mailer: AOL 9.1 sub 5000 X-Spam-Flag:NO -------------------------------1226884120 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yikes, I see from Lorn's reply and the Hartzell web site that 68" and 72" props are used on 360's. The 72" prop was just too long. Hmmmm, 70" seems an odd ball for the 360. Grayhawk In a message dated 11/16/2008 5:04:55 P.M. Central Standard Time, mmcmanus@grandecom.net writes: The hub is close to what you identify...HC-F2YR-1 The blade design is....F7666A-6 (is that [76" less 6" = 70"]) Someone mentioned that the 320 could use a 70" prop, but it sounds like a different blade than what you identify. I'm really confused now??? Thanks, Matt McManus Quoting Sky2high@aol.com: > Matt, > > Interesting. Can you give us the hub and blade designation - perhaps it is > the setup that 320's use. That is: hub HC-F2YL-1F with blades F8468D-14 (84" > less 14" = 70"). I have gone thru, uh, several blades and it was some years > ago that the 320 set-up went from "normal" to "experimental". Oh well. > > > Scott Krueger AKA Grayhawk > Lancair N92EX IO320 SB 89/96 > Aurora, IL (KARR) > > Pilot not TSO'd, Certificated score only > 70%. > > > > > In a message dated 11/15/2008 6:36:51 A.M. Central Standard Time, > mmcmanus@grandecom.net writes: > > I'm in the middle of getting my Hartzell 2 blade prop overhauled for my > Lancair > 360. I got a new hub at 50% discount from Hartzell to eliminate the > recurring > eddy current inspection. The prop shop doing the overhaul has issues with > the > blades and they will not issue the formal 8131 (I think) paperwork for the > overhaul. The problem is the blade length. > > I bought the airplane 3 years ago and it had an overhauled "0" time prop > when > the airplane was built in 2002. The blades are 70" long according to the > prop > shop. They also say that the Hartzell recommends a 72" blade. But Hartzell > also allows a 68" blade for the Lyc 360. They do not however, recommend a > 70" > blade. > > The question is, since I've had no problems or vibration issues with my 70" > blades - should I be concerned? I guess Hartzell's recommendation is based > on > some harmonic resonance or some other vibration related things (which are > outside my knowledge). Does my 70" blade length provide cruise or climb > capabilities that are greater or lesser than a 68" prop. > > I'm planning to have the 70" blades reinstalled on the new hub, and the log > entry will just say the standard overhaul stuff (except the IAW stuff), and > it > will specify "experimental A/C usage only." > > Any thoughts? > > Thanks, > Matt McManus > lnc2 360 > 408 hours total time airplane. > > > > > -- > For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html > > > > **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & > more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir= htt > p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) > -- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news & more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=htt p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001) -------------------------------1226884120 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yikes,  I see from Lorn's reply and the Hartzell web site that 68"= and=20 72" props are used on 360's.  The 72" prop was just too long.  Hmm= mm,=20 70" seems an odd ball for the 360.
 
Grayhawk
 
In a message dated 11/16/2008 5:04:55 P.M. Central Standard Time,=20 mmcmanus@grandecom.net writes:
<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>The hub=20 is close to what you identify...HC-F2YR-1
The blade design=20 is....F7666A-6  (is that [76" less 6" =3D 70"])

Someone mentio= ned=20 that the 320 could use a 70" prop, but it sounds like a
different blade= =20 than what you identify.

I'm really confused now???
Thanks,
Ma= tt=20 McManus

Quoting Sky2high@aol.com:

> Matt,
>
>= =20 Interesting.  Can you give us the hub and blade designation -=20 perhaps  it is
> the setup that 320's use. That is: hub HC-F2YL= -1F=20 with blades F8468D-14  (84"
> less 14" =3D 70").  I have g= one=20 thru, uh, several blades and it was some  years
> ago that the=20= 320=20 set-up went from "normal" to "experimental".  Oh =20 well.
>
>
> Scott Krueger  AKA Grayhawk
> Lan= cair=20 N92EX IO320 SB 89/96
> Aurora, IL (KARR)
>
> Pilot = not=20 TSO'd, Certificated score only >=20 70%.
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 11/15/2008= =20 6:36:51 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> mmcmanus@grandecom.net=20 writes:
>
> I'm in  the middle of getting my Hartzell 2 b= lade=20 prop overhauled for my
> Lancair
> 360.  I got a new hub=20= at=20 50% discount from Hartzell to  eliminate the
> recurring
>= ;=20 eddy current inspection. The prop shop doing the  overhaul has issues= =20 with
> the
> blades and they will not issue the formal 8131&nb= sp;=20 (I think) paperwork for the
> overhaul.  The problem is the=20 blade  length.
>
> I bought the airplane 3 years ago and=20= it=20 had an overhauled "0"  time prop
> when
> the airplane wa= s=20 built in 2002. The blades are 70" long  according to the
>=20 prop
> shop.  They also say that the Hartzell  recommends=20= a=20 72" blade. But Hartzell
> also allows a 68" blade for the Lyc =20 360.  They do not however, recommend a
> 70"
>=20 blade.
>
> The question  is, since I've had no problems o= r=20 vibration issues with my 70"
> blades -  should I be concerned?= I=20 guess Hartzell's recommendation is based
> on
> some =20 harmonic resonance or some other vibration related things (which =20 are
> outside my knowledge).  Does my 70" blade length provide=20 cruise or  climb
> capabilities that are greater or lesser than= a=20 68" prop.
>
> I'm  planning to have the 70" blades=20 reinstalled on the new hub, and the  log
> entry will just say=20= the=20 standard overhaul stuff (except the IAW stuff),  and
> it
&g= t;=20 will specify "experimental A/C usage only."
>
> Any =20 thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Matt McManus
> lnc2=20 360
> 408 hours total time =20 airplane.
>
>
>
>
> --
> For archives=20= and=20 unsub =20 http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
>
>
&g= t;
>=20 **************Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news=20 &
>
more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212774565x= 1200812037/aol?redir=3Dhtt
>=20 p://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=3Demlcntusdown00000001)>





--
For=20 archives and unsub=20 http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html



-------------------------------1226884120--