prop change

This is the place where we can all meet and speak about whatever is on the mind.
new reply
awash2002
A2A ACE
Posts: 2995
Joined: 01 Aug 2013, 06:13
Location: KCZL

prop change

Post by awash2002 »

I'm thinking of taking N9408H up to Hartzell Propeller to have one of their 3 bladed composite constant speed for my 182 I'll have to give them all of the information for my 182T. The prop I will be using is HC-F3YR-1ARF/F8068 82" 3 blade constant speed with spinner assebly part number A-2295-3P
Image
Image
Image
Image

n421nj
Chief Master Sergeant
Posts: 3541
Joined: 17 Mar 2013, 18:01
Location: KCDW

Re: prop change

Post by n421nj »

Unless ur planning on getting in and out of short strips keep the 2 blade. Faster cruise
Andrew

ASUS ROG Maximus Hero X, Intel i7 8770K, Nvidia GTX 1080, 32GB Corsair Vengeance 3000 RAM, Corsair H90i liquid cooler.

All Accusim Aircraft
Accu-Feel, 3d Lights Redux

awash2002
A2A ACE
Posts: 2995
Joined: 01 Aug 2013, 06:13
Location: KCZL

Re: prop change

Post by awash2002 »

OK but at 7000 I have seen cruise speeds with the 3 blade at 147ktas leaned to 12gph at WOT wide open throttle
Image
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
AKar
A2A Master Mechanic
Posts: 5209
Joined: 26 May 2013, 05:03

Re: prop change

Post by AKar »

Perhaps the most common reason to go from 2-blade to 3-blade prop is the noise reduction. Smaller propeller diameter allows for slower tip speeds. With faster engines that push the blade tips supersonic the noise reduction can be significant.

-Esa

awash2002
A2A ACE
Posts: 2995
Joined: 01 Aug 2013, 06:13
Location: KCZL

Re: prop change

Post by awash2002 »

Also Akar better climb performance
Image
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
AKar
A2A Master Mechanic
Posts: 5209
Joined: 26 May 2013, 05:03

Re: prop change

Post by AKar »

awash2002 wrote:Also Akar better climb performance
Kind of depends. One pretty technically oriented float plane pilot I knew well before his passing once commented that "Typically the performance of 3-blade props [on a 185] is not significantly worse than that of the originals." :mrgreen:

One point of view is that if we are "significantly under ~300 hp", there typically is little reason to go three-bladed (in regards of performance figures - there can be other reasons than that of course!). Two-bladers cruise a bit faster while three-bladed props typically show very little improvement in climb performance if anything. At higher horsepower, coming up to near 300 or so the word is, the extra blade adds more noticeably to the other performance while the lost amount of cruise speed diminishes towards negligible. At around there the optimal blade count goes up one.

-Esa

awash2002
A2A ACE
Posts: 2995
Joined: 01 Aug 2013, 06:13
Location: KCZL

Re: prop change

Post by awash2002 »

I'm thinking about throwing the 2 blade on 08H and fly it with a two blade prop since it's 230HP so a 3 blade prop wouldn't be needed
Image
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
Oracle427
Chief Master Sergeant
Posts: 3916
Joined: 02 Sep 2013, 19:30
Location: 3N6
Contact:

Re: prop change

Post by Oracle427 »

While not simulated, consider that 3 blade props have a smaller diameter and are useful for ground clearance when operating on turf or other unimproved surfaces.
Flight Simmer since 1983. PP ASEL IR Tailwheel
N28021 1979 Super Viking 17-30A

awash2002
A2A ACE
Posts: 2995
Joined: 01 Aug 2013, 06:13
Location: KCZL

Re: prop change

Post by awash2002 »

I've seen 182's with 2 blade props in and out of Moontown 3M5 and it's grass for grass strips I will either take the 172 or the Cherokee and leave the 182 to normal airport runways
Image
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
AKar
A2A Master Mechanic
Posts: 5209
Joined: 26 May 2013, 05:03

Re: prop change

Post by AKar »

Oracle427 wrote:While not simulated, consider that 3 blade props have a smaller diameter and are useful for ground clearance when operating on turf or other unimproved surfaces.
Exactly. :) One of those things outside the book values of performance! Even things such as ILS interference can come into play as the blade passing frequency is quite close to the baseband signal frequency of the system.

There certainly are reasons why Cessna went for three-blader on the 182. How the performance would compare in between a modern prop of two and that of three blades, I don't know, and the estimates in the flight model are certainly allowed to have some artistic freedom - with the "experimental" labels and all!

-Esa

User avatar
AKar
A2A Master Mechanic
Posts: 5209
Joined: 26 May 2013, 05:03

Re: prop change

Post by AKar »

awash2002 wrote:I've seen 182's with 2 blade props in and out of Moontown 3M5 and it's grass for grass strips I will either take the 172 or the Cherokee and leave the 182 to normal airport runways
The older models were with two blades from the factory.

-Esa

awash2002
A2A ACE
Posts: 2995
Joined: 01 Aug 2013, 06:13
Location: KCZL

Re: prop change

Post by awash2002 »

I think they went to the 3 blade prop when Cessna started building the 182 again. Plus I like the look of a 2 blade better then the 3 blade anyway
Image
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
AKar
A2A Master Mechanic
Posts: 5209
Joined: 26 May 2013, 05:03

Re: prop change

Post by AKar »

Yes, the 3-blade came with the T model, and applies to S-range as well.

In the simulator, there is a freedom of choice, and well-defined options. In reality, the benefits and drawbacks are often muddy, and the options tend to be not so well-defined. It would be interesting to flight-test the S with the two-blader and the three-blader to see if there is any difference.

-Esa

awash2002
A2A ACE
Posts: 2995
Joined: 01 Aug 2013, 06:13
Location: KCZL

Re: prop change

Post by awash2002 »

I would like to see the results my self on the S model
Image
Image
Image
Image

new reply

Return to “Pilot's Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests