Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao06.cox.net ([68.230.241.33] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2) with ESMTP id 360063 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 15:39:26 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.33; envelope-from=daveleonard@cox.net Received: from davidandanne ([68.111.224.107]) by fed1rmmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.03.02.01 201-2131-111-104-103-20040709) with SMTP id <20040810193854.DCWN18508.fed1rmmtao06.cox.net@davidandanne> for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 15:38:54 -0400 From: "DaveLeonard" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Warp was Re: Turbos from the land of Oz Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 12:38:58 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0070_01C47ED7.016C26F0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0070_01C47ED7.016C26F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks for the input Grant. Dave Leonard Pros: The ground adjust capability and method are good. It's nice to be able to dial in how much prop you want. Nicks and dings in the prop are easily fixed with a glob of epoxy and some sandpaper. The prop construction and retention in the HP hub seem pretty positive. Cons: Doesn't give the performance I was expecting. After reading Mr. Lipps' article in the last Contact issue, I suspect the airfoil isn't very efficient, as he pointed out in the article that any prop with a flat bottom and a sharp leading edge has poor efficiency, and the Warp Drive has both. 'Course, I do have to add the caveat that I fly out of an airport at 5440' elevation. The one time I tried it at a 1000' elevation, it was like a completely different airplane. The composite construction is very sensitive to nicks. If you go the Warp Drive route, make sure you get the nickel leading edge protection. Can't say much about the taper on the blades - my cruise speed seems less than other Zodie drivers, but that may be due to a general need for aerodynamic cleanup and the extra weight of the Continental. Grant Schemmel ------=_NextPart_000_0070_01C47ED7.016C26F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks for the input = Grant.

Dave Leonard

Pros: The ground adjust capability and method are good. = It's nice=20 to be able to dial in how much prop you want.

Nicks and dings in the prop are easily fixed with a glob of = epoxy and=20 some sandpaper.

The=20 prop construction and retention in the HP hub seem pretty=20 positive.

Cons: Doesn't give the performance I was = expecting. After=20 reading Mr. Lipps' article in the last Contact issue, I suspect the = airfoil=20 isn't very efficient, as he pointed out in the article that any prop = with a=20 flat bottom and a sharp leading edge has poor efficiency, and the Warp = Drive=20 has both. 'Course, I do have to add the caveat that I fly out of = an=20 airport at 5440' elevation. The one time I tried it at a 1000'=20 elevation, it was like a completely different = airplane.

The=20 composite construction is very sensitive to nicks. If you go the = Warp=20 Drive route, make sure you get the nickel leading edge=20 protection.

Can't say much about the taper on the blades - my cruise = speed seems=20 less than other Zodie drivers, but that may be due to a general need = for=20 aerodynamic cleanup and the extra weight of the=20 Continental.

Grant Schemmel

------=_NextPart_000_0070_01C47ED7.016C26F0--