>
Frans wrote :
>
> It has a lot to do with sound. A 3-blader produces less sound.
> Furthermore it has less vibrations=2C and to some folks looks sexier.
I am not sure about the sound difference. My 2-blader makes a very attracti
ve low-frequency sound. To me it appears quieter than the Warp Drive. You h
ave the same prop=2C so maybe you can sometime compare it to another Europa
.
Karl
>
> A 2-blade prop IS more efficient. The tips of the prop slice through the
> air with almost the speed of sound=2C if you have two tips instead of
> three=2C you reduce drag quite a lot.
> If is the same question versus a two wing airplane or a bi-plane. A
> bi-plane has more drag because it has more frontal wing surface. More
> wings is not more efficient=2C just like more propeller blades is not mor
e
> efficient.
>
> My propeller still converts the same amount of engine power to thrust=2C
> but it has less frontal surface slicing through the air. Once I' flying
=2C
> I will be happy to share performance data.
> And no=2C no first flight today. :-( The whole airspace has been shut-dow
n
> because of the volcanic ash.
>
> > Just because most aircraft designed 30 years ago or earlier had
> > two blades doesn't mean that it was best for aerodynamics=2C just
> > best for the marketplace at the time.
>
> Well=2C then this must have been the reason the bi- and three-plane
> airplanes vanished from the market as well? Just because two wings was
> cheaper?
>
> Frans
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
|