|
My friends who flew the P-39, always said they worried about the drive
shaft running between their legs, breaking loose :o)
Big John
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 13:23:05 GMT, George <gvig01@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Richard Lamb wrote:
>> ADK wrote:
>>
>>> IF you had to design a PSRU, to drive a pusher propellor via shaft,
>>> what would your experience dictate? Thinking along the lines of a
>>> gearbelt, chain or gear. Please, I'd appreciate the collective
>>> experience available on this group. I've decided on the aircraft,
>>> but want to make it the most reliable and safest it can be.
>>>
>>> "ADK" <aklettke@okanagan.net> wrote in message
>>> news:X6TXf.28774$%H.11944@clgrps13...
>>>
>>>> This is probably going to open old wounds. What I'd like is
>>>> experienced input on the advantages, for economic, efficiency and
>>>> longevity etc. of different types of redrives.
>>>>
>>>> I'm leaning towards a cog-belt reducer in a 6 cylinder, liquid
>>>> cooled, configuration driving a long drive shaft to the prop.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> The collective experience is zilch = nada = squat = undefined.
>>
>> THAT is what everybody had been trying to tell you.
>>
>> Wait a second. Look around the airport.
>>
>> How many shaft driven propellers do you see?
>>
>> Have you ever seen?
>>
>> If you are heart set on doing it, I sincerely wish you luck.
>>
>> But I cannot offer any further advice - 'cuz they ain't none...
>>
>>
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>Richard,
>
>Didn't the military do this once?? Seems there was the P-39 Aircobra,
>shaft driven from a rear mounted engine?? Are the gray cells working
>that far back??
>
>Not that it would be applicable to an experimental, but at least It was
>once done?
>
>George
|
|
Re: PSRU design advantages
