Return-Path: Received: from [24.25.9.103] (HELO ms-smtp-04-eri0.southeast.rr.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2) with ESMTP id 393459 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 04 Sep 2004 21:31:45 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.103; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from EDWARD (cpe-069-132-183-211.carolina.rr.com [69.132.183.211]) by ms-smtp-04-eri0.southeast.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with SMTP id i851VDSH014307 for ; Sat, 4 Sep 2004 21:31:14 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <001301c492e8$0a7c6910$2402a8c0@EDWARD> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Progress Report on Monster prop installation Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 21:31:17 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_01C492C6.832CD5B0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C492C6.832CD5B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well, Rusty I finally got the new Monster prop on the aircraft and most of the = spinner work done. Boy, does it make a difference in the looks, I used = to think my old prop just had a small portion sticking out beyond the = cowling (especially when viewed from back of the aircraft), but the = monster prop really sticks out there. Looks like it should really haul = this airplane along quickly. Good news is that the shaft fitted with no lapping required and I have = 9" prop clearance ( I though I was only going to have 7" the min that = Van recommends). For some reason My RV-6 sits with the nose a bit = higher ever since I replace the old nose gear rod with the newer beefier = one - appears it does not deflect as much as the old one under the = weight. For this test period, I am putting the old manifold (Ver 2) on that gave = me 5600-5800 static as don't want to have the prop trimmed for an anemic = engine {:>). Interestingly today, I was replacing the old home made boat anchor = manifold that I had used for testing my variable intake. I had taken = off the old slab boat anchor a day or two ago but left the manifold = gasket attached to the block. When I went to adjust the gasket prior to = putting on the ver 2 lower manifold, I found the gasket on backwards! I = was shocked because that orientation covered approx. 1/2 of the primary = and secondary intakes!! You don't think I flew with it that way while = testing my variable length manifold do you - Naaaa! It must have fallen = off when I removed the slab manifold and I just slapped the gasket back = on the block and flopped it in the process - right? Hummm, I wonder = what the effects would have been IF I had flown with it on backwards - = would power have suffered??? Was my test of the variable intake = invalidated because of a misoriented gasket - Naaaaa!! I probably would = not have produced enough power to get airborne - but it was curious that = varying the length make no difference at all, Hummmm. I plan to try a = different version of the variable length in the near future - this time = I'll pay particular attention to gasket orientation. In any case, I should be ready to fire it up by Monday and do some = ground tests and hopefully get airborne during the later part of the = week. By the way, I don't recall hearing any comments from you about any = increase in acceleration on take-off. Was there any? I know you = indicated the P effect increase was quite noticeable - but how about = acceleration? Ed Ed Anderson RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Matthews, NC ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C492C6.832CD5B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Well, Rusty

I finally got the = new Monster=20 prop on the aircraft and most of the spinner work done. Boy, does = it make=20 a difference in the looks, I used to think my old prop just had a small = portion=20 sticking out beyond the cowling (especially when viewed from back of the = aircraft), but the monster prop really sticks out there. Looks = like it=20 should really haul this airplane along quickly.

Good news is that the shaft fitted with = no lapping=20 required and I have 9" prop clearance ( I though I was only going to = have 7" the=20 min that Van recommends). For some reason My RV-6 sits with the = nose a bit=20 higher ever since I replace the old nose gear rod with the newer beefier = one -=20 appears it does not deflect as much as the old one under the=20 weight.

For this test period, I am putting the = old manifold=20 (Ver 2) on that gave me 5600-5800 static as don't want to have the prop = trimmed=20 for an anemic engine {:>).

Interestingly today, I was replacing = the old home=20 made boat anchor manifold that I had used for testing my variable = intake. =20 I had taken off the old slab boat anchor a day or two ago but left the = manifold=20 gasket attached to the block. When I went to adjust the gasket = prior to=20 putting on the ver 2 lower manifold, I found the gasket on = backwards! I=20 was shocked because that orientation covered approx. 1/2 of the primary = and=20 secondary intakes!! You don't think I flew with it that way = while=20 testing my variable length manifold do you - Naaaa! It must have = fallen=20 off when I removed the slab manifold and I just slapped the gasket back = on the=20 block and flopped it in the process - right? Hummm, I wonder what = the=20 effects would have been IF I had flown with it on backwards - would = power have=20 suffered??? Was my test of the variable intake invalidated because = of a=20 misoriented gasket - Naaaaa!! I probably would not have produced = enough=20 power to get airborne - but it was curious that varying the length make = no=20 difference at all, Hummmm. I plan to try a different version of = the=20 variable length in the near future - this time I'll pay particular = attention to=20 gasket orientation.

In any case, I should be ready to fire = it up by=20 Monday and do some ground tests and hopefully get airborne during the = later part=20 of the week.

By the way, I don't recall hearing any = comments=20 from you about any increase in acceleration on take-off. Was there = any? I know you indicated the P effect increase was quite = noticeable - but=20 how about acceleration?

Ed

Ed Anderson
RV-6A N494BW Rotary=20 Powered
Matthews, NC

------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C492C6.832CD5B0--