| Author | Message | ||
     Douglas Hoff New member Username: Dhoff Post Number: 7 Registered: 05-2003 |
The Hoffs already have an MT prop on their Express. I think there are others?? Doug Hoff | ||
| Anonymous |
This Express from the Des Moine area had one at Oshkosh.  Richard Martin | ||
| Reinhard Metz New member Username: Reinhard_metz Post Number: 6 Registered: 03-2003 |
It will be very interesting to watch how that first Express does with the Aerocomposites prop. The technology is carbon and glass fiber and epoxy. The interesting and most innovative part is the blade retention approach: The carbon fiber comes together in a cylindrical fashion and then is tear-drop rolled around a ring at the base of the blade. The assembly of metal and impregnated fiber is molded all together in a fashion that when you see it, it's obvious it will never come apart. The blades are designed to flex slightly under load, and are metal edged. They can also be repaired with standard composite techniques. Contrast that to the retention mechanism of an MT prop - 6 big wood screws! The Aerocomposites founders are a couple of (mature) mechanical engineer PhD types that I believe came from Hamilton-Standard. They seem extremely nice and very competent, and are working their way up the curve on hubs and engines upported. No, I don't work for these guys - I've just been very impressed by talking to them at the airshows. Reinhard Metz | ||
| wayne norris New member Username: Wayne_norris Post Number: 9 Registered: 02-2003 |
I have 170 hours on my EX2K with MT and 400 on my DR109/MT mostly at 2700rpm and acro time. As far as props go...The aerobatic engine/props are run at what most GA pilots would consider harsh to say the least. There have been failers with every prop type out there. I maybe the first to run mine for 500 hrs as I don't plan to take it off before then. The best things to look are, time before over haul, cost,factory support and performance. Everything is a compromise. Metal props run longer and are better in the rain. Composite props are lighter, put less strain on the crank but may show more wear in the rain and TBO is lower. Performance is dependant on many things. I personally like my MTs mostly because they are 45# lighter than a metal prop. In light of the numerous nose heavy Express nose dingings, weight off the front is a good thing. As far as performance goes, the wide swept blades on my EX2K, I think are costing me 10-15mph at cruise but it makes up for it on climb.Flying out of my 2500' grass strip on a hot day with a full load, I am up and gone. I will race any one in a climb to 10 or 18k.So I will gladly give up the top end. If there was one answer, we would not all be building our own planes and every one would be flying an Express. | ||
| Douglas Hoff New member Username: Dhoff Post Number: 8 Registered: 05-2003 |
One thing no one has mentioned about using a composite or a prop like the MT. Hit the runway and you have a lot of toothpicks (on the MT) but don't have to worry about a new engine! A big advantage over metal, and when combined with the extra weight makes me think theyr'e worth looking at. | ||
| Jim Oyler New member Username: Midniteoyl Post Number: 22 Registered: 07-2003 |
AeroComposites claim that the last prop stike they had, the blades only flexed (saving the engine) but did not break (saving the belly pan) http://www.aerocomposites.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.viewPage&page_id=D84B9F8 D-5004-D739-A5A07B7031786BA9 Excerpt: "In a propeller ground strike incident involving an AeroComposites 3-blade propeller (aircraft nose gear collapsed on landing), the 3 composite propeller blades flexed (did not fracture) and the leading edge sheathes remained bonded and attached throughout multiple propeller rotations and blade ground strikes. As a result, the high strength AeroComposites composite blades absorbed/carried most of the ground impact load with minimal damage sustained to the underside of the aircraft." Jim | ||
| Tom R. Hutchison New member Username: Tomhutch Post Number: 125 Registered: 01-2003 |
Just a reminder to everyone who posts pictures. Please reduce the image size to no more than 640 pixels wide. This really cuts the time down to load the page for those with dial-up internet connections. It also lets you see the whole image without scrolling sidways. I was able to rescale the prop image above but its a pain to do after it is posted. Thanks, Tom | ||
| doug shell Unregistered guest |
i recently sold a velocity io540 with a whirlwind prop i tried both the ww and the mt ww outperformed the mt cruise was 200kts at 13gph i went to the factory and looked at their operation and was very impressed the quality of the workmanship was excellent | ||
| Roy Howard Davis New member Username: Royhdavis Post Number: 6 Registered: 01-2003 |
Now there is a race to see who is the first with an Aero Composites prop flying. I just put down a deposit on one. I was thinking the default of the metal prop until I read this forum, checked out the AC Web page and spent some time on the phone with Harry out there. I'm also going with the IOF550 FADEC engine and Harry was one of the founders of Aerosance. Small world. Anyway, I"ll get to find out what new fangled electronics and fancy plastic prop can do compared to the traditional way of doing things. Thanks for everyone's opinion and research. I feel better about the decisions going into our plane. BTW, just posted more pictures of our N10NM in factory finish at www.nancymoon.com Roy | ||
| Jim Oyler New member Username: Midniteoyl Post Number: 24 Registered: 07-2003 |
Roy - Glad our little discussion was of help! |