TT GP 42 prop data
08-30-2010, 08:59 AM
#1
TT GP 42 prop data
This was actually fun to do and would have been really fun if was a little cooler.
Engine:
Thunder Tiger GP 42
All props are APC except where noted. 15% nitro, synthetic castor blend (Mach 7) fuel.
Engine ‘A’ has raced one season and has about two gallons of fuel run through it.
Engine ‘B’ had only about a half of a gallon of fuel run through it. Engine was disassembled, cleaned and de-burred before first run.
Engine ‘C’ was purchased used so no run time information other than racing in two or three races this season.
Temp 88 degrees and 54% humidity, Wind out of the SE at 10-15mph with gust around 20. Pylon course was setup in a North South direction. 650ft ASL.
Six measurements were made with each engine, Max RPM, Max Thrust, Max MPH and three pylon course mph readings.
The “How Fast” unit was attached to the left wingtip of a Sky Raider Mach II (pinched nose version) and triggered by using the landing gear channel on the Spectrum DX7 radio. ALL MPH READINGS WERE TAKEN IN FLIGHT.
The Max RPM number was taken by slowly leaning the engine while monitoring rpm with an optical tach. The engine was then adjusted for flight (richened). This varied from about 200rpm to 1000 rpm depending on the prop. Some settings worked out to be too lean and the engine sagged during flight. The airplane was landed re-adjusted and re-flown. Max thrust measurement was made with flight mixture setting.
The inflight readings were taken for MAX mph and pylon course speeds. Max mph was made in straight and level flight. Three pylon readings were made. The first was the end of the straight away (A) the middle of the turn (B) and the exit of the turn (C).
Engine A
Prop RPM Thrust Max mph A B C
9.5x6 14,100 4lb,4oz 74.4 71.5 68.1 66.3
9x6 14,610 3lb 72.3 70.5 66.4 62.9
9x6.5 13,500 4lb,1oz 69.2 67.4 68.5 66.0
Engine B
Prop RPM Thrust Max mph A B C
9.5x6 13,200 3lb, 4oz 70.3 67.4 64.2 60.3
9x6 15,160 3lb,4oz 67.7 61.8 62.2 54.9
9x6.5 13,780 3lb,1oz 63.3 missed 60.7 62.4
NOTE: This engine was very difficult to get a good needle setting and the runs were not very consistent.
Engine C
Prop RPM Thrust Max mph A B C
9.5x6 13,980 4lb 70.2 70.1 69.9 70.2
9x6 14,570 3lb,1oz 69.8 68.6 68.8 66.8
9x6.5 13,650 3lb,1oz 69.1 63.3 61.7 59.0
Master Airscrew
10x6N 13,080 4lb,8oz 74.0 72.5 65.4 63.7
Great, so what does this all mean?
Keep in mind that the data really needs to be repeated a couple of times so that we know it is solid. We will do this one more time but with only one engine. This data took over three hours of test to collect.
I would throw out the data for the B engine because it was just not ready for racing. So, don’t show up for a race without a fully broken in engine. You will have problems with it. Bushing engines do not like lean runs! However, this engine turned faster than the other two with the low load 9x6 prop. This may be due to the “cleaning”. This makes a pretty good point for having a Golden Prop that all winners must run for a tach test.
The props that did best were the larger diameter props. Why? My theory is that the airframe has so much drag to it that it benefits from the extra thrust. This was very apparent during take off. The 9.5 and 10 inch props yanked the airplane off the ground in our high grass. The 9 inch props would not take off until the plane got to a bare spot and gained speed. The turn speeds also varied less with the larger prop due to the prop being able to overcome the drag of turning better than the small diameter ones.
All of the engines seemed to like the 9.5x6 prop the best, followed by the 10x6N. The engine was easier to tune and was faster.
Next we will be running the same test with the TT Pro 40. Maybe the weekend after Labor Day weekend.
Tim
Engine:
Thunder Tiger GP 42
All props are APC except where noted. 15% nitro, synthetic castor blend (Mach 7) fuel.
Engine ‘A’ has raced one season and has about two gallons of fuel run through it.
Engine ‘B’ had only about a half of a gallon of fuel run through it. Engine was disassembled, cleaned and de-burred before first run.
Engine ‘C’ was purchased used so no run time information other than racing in two or three races this season.
Temp 88 degrees and 54% humidity, Wind out of the SE at 10-15mph with gust around 20. Pylon course was setup in a North South direction. 650ft ASL.
Six measurements were made with each engine, Max RPM, Max Thrust, Max MPH and three pylon course mph readings.
The “How Fast” unit was attached to the left wingtip of a Sky Raider Mach II (pinched nose version) and triggered by using the landing gear channel on the Spectrum DX7 radio. ALL MPH READINGS WERE TAKEN IN FLIGHT.
The Max RPM number was taken by slowly leaning the engine while monitoring rpm with an optical tach. The engine was then adjusted for flight (richened). This varied from about 200rpm to 1000 rpm depending on the prop. Some settings worked out to be too lean and the engine sagged during flight. The airplane was landed re-adjusted and re-flown. Max thrust measurement was made with flight mixture setting.
The inflight readings were taken for MAX mph and pylon course speeds. Max mph was made in straight and level flight. Three pylon readings were made. The first was the end of the straight away (A) the middle of the turn (B) and the exit of the turn (C).
Engine A
Prop RPM Thrust Max mph A B C
9.5x6 14,100 4lb,4oz 74.4 71.5 68.1 66.3
9x6 14,610 3lb 72.3 70.5 66.4 62.9
9x6.5 13,500 4lb,1oz 69.2 67.4 68.5 66.0
Engine B
Prop RPM Thrust Max mph A B C
9.5x6 13,200 3lb, 4oz 70.3 67.4 64.2 60.3
9x6 15,160 3lb,4oz 67.7 61.8 62.2 54.9
9x6.5 13,780 3lb,1oz 63.3 missed 60.7 62.4
NOTE: This engine was very difficult to get a good needle setting and the runs were not very consistent.
Engine C
Prop RPM Thrust Max mph A B C
9.5x6 13,980 4lb 70.2 70.1 69.9 70.2
9x6 14,570 3lb,1oz 69.8 68.6 68.8 66.8
9x6.5 13,650 3lb,1oz 69.1 63.3 61.7 59.0
Master Airscrew
10x6N 13,080 4lb,8oz 74.0 72.5 65.4 63.7
Great, so what does this all mean?
Keep in mind that the data really needs to be repeated a couple of times so that we know it is solid. We will do this one more time but with only one engine. This data took over three hours of test to collect.
I would throw out the data for the B engine because it was just not ready for racing. So, don’t show up for a race without a fully broken in engine. You will have problems with it. Bushing engines do not like lean runs! However, this engine turned faster than the other two with the low load 9x6 prop. This may be due to the “cleaning”. This makes a pretty good point for having a Golden Prop that all winners must run for a tach test.
The props that did best were the larger diameter props. Why? My theory is that the airframe has so much drag to it that it benefits from the extra thrust. This was very apparent during take off. The 9.5 and 10 inch props yanked the airplane off the ground in our high grass. The 9 inch props would not take off until the plane got to a bare spot and gained speed. The turn speeds also varied less with the larger prop due to the prop being able to overcome the drag of turning better than the small diameter ones.
All of the engines seemed to like the 9.5x6 prop the best, followed by the 10x6N. The engine was easier to tune and was faster.
Next we will be running the same test with the TT Pro 40. Maybe the weekend after Labor Day weekend.
Tim
08-30-2010, 08:18 PM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Alabaster,
AL
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
How about trying some 10% fuel? Or trying 10% in the TT .40's. Or trying an 11 x 4 MA prop on the the GP's. Or any combination thereof. The idea is to make the Pro .40 slow down for novice, right? To keep them from buying an engine that won't be used much?
08-30-2010, 09:20 PM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Willis,
TX
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
Ok you see the speed dropped every lap, you said you adjusted the engine to the rich side, just how far? What was the rpm on "The Pinch?" What glow plug did you use? What did it look like after the runs? What color was the exhaust slime on the airframe? How much slime was there?
Oh and the longer the prop the better the "Flywheel" effect it has.
Oh and the longer the prop the better the "Flywheel" effect it has.
08-31-2010, 09:14 AM
#4
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
The mixture adjustment varied with the prop. The pinch test was used to check the needle setting and then the airplane was flown. If it ran good a speed measurement was taken. If the engine sagged (which happened a couple of times) we re-adjusted and flew again.
The max rpm is what was recorded. Please go back and read how that was done. We were only looking for a peak rpm. As you know, when you slowly lean the mixture you start to get a "flat" spot where the engine does not increase rpm and is as lean as it can run. This setting is too lean for flight, especially with a bushing motor. As the prop unloads in flight the rpm will increase (Eagle Tree guys, help me out here) but by how much???. In the past, I have tried to use a doppler sonic measurement but it just doesn't have enough resolution to determine the true rpm in flight.
Glow plug was an OS #8. The plug was not checked for color after each run. It would have not had enough run time to get any meaningful data from it. As it was, it took a long time to do these test with having to swap out two engines so we kept the run time to a minimum.
Exhaust slime was a blue-ish green (the color of the fuel we used). I would say there was a slight brownish coloration.
Flywheel effect would improve idle but I don't see it helping in the air. The disk area is greater with a larger diameter prop which in turn moves a larger volume of air and provides more thrust for a given rpm. If the prop puts too much of a load on the engine, the engine falls out of its power curve and the speed will go down as the engine is no longer applying max power to the prop. Turns load the engine down. How well the engine can maintain rpm through the turn will help exit speed. Lots of trade offs.
A 9 inch prop has 63.6 square inches of area where a 10 inch has 78.5 square inches.
It would be nice to have an engine dyno, but I don't have one. I remember reading in one of the magazines many years ago where someone had built one. It measured torque, and thrust. Building one is simple, calibrating it is much more difficult.
Have you tried the 9.5x6 APC prop on the GP42? It is a better match for that engine than the 9x6. If I was racing in Novice class, I would be using the 9.5x6 APC and then concentrating on my flying skills. Flying a tight consistant course is a better advantage that any of these props can deliver.
Getting the Pro 40 speed down to the GP 42 will be a challenge! The speed will need to be reduced by around 13mph while not overloading or exceeding the max rpm of the Pro 40. I think it will be worthwhile to do this as a lot of pilots in our area are completely turned off at having to buy a bushing motor that would only be used for Novice class racing. The TT Pro 40 is a great engine and most flyers would use it on any sport plane to race, fun fly or just sport fly.
The max rpm is what was recorded. Please go back and read how that was done. We were only looking for a peak rpm. As you know, when you slowly lean the mixture you start to get a "flat" spot where the engine does not increase rpm and is as lean as it can run. This setting is too lean for flight, especially with a bushing motor. As the prop unloads in flight the rpm will increase (Eagle Tree guys, help me out here) but by how much???. In the past, I have tried to use a doppler sonic measurement but it just doesn't have enough resolution to determine the true rpm in flight.
Glow plug was an OS #8. The plug was not checked for color after each run. It would have not had enough run time to get any meaningful data from it. As it was, it took a long time to do these test with having to swap out two engines so we kept the run time to a minimum.
Exhaust slime was a blue-ish green (the color of the fuel we used). I would say there was a slight brownish coloration.
Flywheel effect would improve idle but I don't see it helping in the air. The disk area is greater with a larger diameter prop which in turn moves a larger volume of air and provides more thrust for a given rpm. If the prop puts too much of a load on the engine, the engine falls out of its power curve and the speed will go down as the engine is no longer applying max power to the prop. Turns load the engine down. How well the engine can maintain rpm through the turn will help exit speed. Lots of trade offs.
A 9 inch prop has 63.6 square inches of area where a 10 inch has 78.5 square inches.
It would be nice to have an engine dyno, but I don't have one. I remember reading in one of the magazines many years ago where someone had built one. It measured torque, and thrust. Building one is simple, calibrating it is much more difficult.
Have you tried the 9.5x6 APC prop on the GP42? It is a better match for that engine than the 9x6. If I was racing in Novice class, I would be using the 9.5x6 APC and then concentrating on my flying skills. Flying a tight consistant course is a better advantage that any of these props can deliver.
Getting the Pro 40 speed down to the GP 42 will be a challenge! The speed will need to be reduced by around 13mph while not overloading or exceeding the max rpm of the Pro 40. I think it will be worthwhile to do this as a lot of pilots in our area are completely turned off at having to buy a bushing motor that would only be used for Novice class racing. The TT Pro 40 is a great engine and most flyers would use it on any sport plane to race, fun fly or just sport fly.
08-31-2010, 10:13 AM
#5
My Feedback: (15)
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
This is good info to know Tim, thanks for taking the time to do all of this. [sm=thumbs_up.gif]
Now having said that, what color socks were you wearing the day of the testing? I see no one has asked that question to you... heck, thats important to know!!!
I would feel that Tim wants to use JUST ONE type of fuel for these tests, that way he will not have to lug around two or three different jugs of fuel come race day - am I far off base with that thought Tim?
Now having said that, what color socks were you wearing the day of the testing? I see no one has asked that question to you... heck, thats important to know!!!
I would feel that Tim wants to use JUST ONE type of fuel for these tests, that way he will not have to lug around two or three different jugs of fuel come race day - am I far off base with that thought Tim?
08-31-2010, 12:11 PM
#6
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Powder Springs,
GA
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
ORIGINAL: Tbatt
Getting the Pro 40 speed down to the GP 42 will be a challenge! The speed will need to be reduced by around 13mph while not overloading or exceeding the max rpm of the Pro 40. I think it will be worthwhile to do this as a lot of pilots in our area are completely turned off at having to buy a bushing motor that would only be used for Novice class racing. The TT Pro 40 is a great engine and most flyers would use it on any sport plane to race, fun fly or just sport fly.
Getting the Pro 40 speed down to the GP 42 will be a challenge! The speed will need to be reduced by around 13mph while not overloading or exceeding the max rpm of the Pro 40. I think it will be worthwhile to do this as a lot of pilots in our area are completely turned off at having to buy a bushing motor that would only be used for Novice class racing. The TT Pro 40 is a great engine and most flyers would use it on any sport plane to race, fun fly or just sport fly.
08-31-2010, 01:37 PM
#7
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
Thunder Tiger list the operating range as 2,000 to 17,000. Will it turn faster? Maybe. Will it throw a rod, maybe.
This being a sport engine, it will most likely reach an rpm limit by simply not being able to intake enough air or exhaust the exhaust gasses or a combination of both.
When I was working on the K&B 4011 and 8011 engines for Q-500 that is what would happen. We would reach a hard limit of 15,000. We tried 50% nitro and a 8x6 pylon prop and all she would do is 15K. This was of course in stock out of the box condition. With "tweaks" it would turn up around 17K. Thats when the rod became a problem.
This being a sport engine, it will most likely reach an rpm limit by simply not being able to intake enough air or exhaust the exhaust gasses or a combination of both.
When I was working on the K&B 4011 and 8011 engines for Q-500 that is what would happen. We would reach a hard limit of 15,000. We tried 50% nitro and a 8x6 pylon prop and all she would do is 15K. This was of course in stock out of the box condition. With "tweaks" it would turn up around 17K. Thats when the rod became a problem.
08-31-2010, 01:49 PM
#8
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Powder Springs,
GA
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
I know folks that are breaking them in on an APC 8/4 prop turning 18-19K and their motors really scream and are stock. I think they use to change out the rear main bearing but am not sure on the newer ones.
08-31-2010, 01:55 PM
#9
My Feedback: (15)
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
I agree with what Barry's thoughts are,... the rear bearing were sometimes bad to let go in the older style ( straight hi speed needle) TT40 engines when they were "turned up" . I have the older style engines running now but also have a newer slant hi needle engine thats still in the box.... waiting for its turn.
It would sometimes trash the internals of the engine when the rear cage of the bearing let go.
Not too pretty ;(
It would sometimes trash the internals of the engine when the rear cage of the bearing let go.
Not too pretty ;(
08-31-2010, 06:03 PM
#11
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Powder Springs,
GA
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
ORIGINAL: Tbatt
According to Doug Bebense, the bearings have improved since the first units came out.
According to Doug Bebense, the bearings have improved since the first units came out.
08-31-2010, 10:36 PM
#13
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Columbus,
IN
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
The Club 40 rules are based on the AMA racing rules. There are 16 sections and the addendum. The single page you see in the "Rules" section at the RCPRO website is Section 16. Serctions 1 to 15 and the Addendum are posted in the Club 40 forum. Section 2 has the definition of "Engine" and lists the things you can change. Bearings are included.
Go to the Club 40 forum at the RCPRO website.
I have just posted a "build" for a lapcounting device to be used with the NMPRA JudgeTimer program.
Ken Erickson
Go to the Club 40 forum at the RCPRO website.
I have just posted a "build" for a lapcounting device to be used with the NMPRA JudgeTimer program.
Ken Erickson
09-01-2010, 07:51 AM
#16
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
Ken,
I'll add it to my list of test. I really like the APC 11x4 for fun fly events. Lots of thrust to be had. Grish used to make a great 11x4 prop that would easily pull five pounds of thrust with a sport 40 engine. For the events we did in competition fun fly, thrust was the most important factor. Five pounds of thrust on a 3.5 pound airplane was fun. Of course this was in the days before 3D. Many of the early "stick" planes were great 3D machines but no one really flew them that way.
Frank,
The reason I "cleaned up" the GP 42 is to see what effect it would have. It is too early to tell right now until the engine is fully broken in. I am totaly against this mod but wanted to see what happens when you do this to the GP. In Novice class, I don't think we will have a problem with cheating. Most of these guys are just beginning to get their feet wet with racing. If they do well they get bumped up to Advanced anyway.
Tear down of engines is not needed if we use a "standard" prop to run engines to check for mods. We are still working this issue. I'm getting lots of input on the subject. Most all of it has been positive toward some type of tech inspection regarding a standard prop and max rpm. We just need to work out the details.
Maybe at the B'ham race I could take some rpm data if you don't mind. We could tach each engine with a APC 9x6 prop sometime during the day to see what the max, min and average rpm is.
Tim
I'll add it to my list of test. I really like the APC 11x4 for fun fly events. Lots of thrust to be had. Grish used to make a great 11x4 prop that would easily pull five pounds of thrust with a sport 40 engine. For the events we did in competition fun fly, thrust was the most important factor. Five pounds of thrust on a 3.5 pound airplane was fun. Of course this was in the days before 3D. Many of the early "stick" planes were great 3D machines but no one really flew them that way.
Frank,
The reason I "cleaned up" the GP 42 is to see what effect it would have. It is too early to tell right now until the engine is fully broken in. I am totaly against this mod but wanted to see what happens when you do this to the GP. In Novice class, I don't think we will have a problem with cheating. Most of these guys are just beginning to get their feet wet with racing. If they do well they get bumped up to Advanced anyway.
Tear down of engines is not needed if we use a "standard" prop to run engines to check for mods. We are still working this issue. I'm getting lots of input on the subject. Most all of it has been positive toward some type of tech inspection regarding a standard prop and max rpm. We just need to work out the details.
Maybe at the B'ham race I could take some rpm data if you don't mind. We could tach each engine with a APC 9x6 prop sometime during the day to see what the max, min and average rpm is.
Tim
09-01-2010, 09:08 AM
#17
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Columbus,
IN
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
Skully, and all,
At one time, there was an attempt to take an Advanced class (now called just RCPRO Club 40) engine and try to use it in the then Novice (now called RCPRO Club 40 Sport). A Super Tigre engine with an 11 X 4 prop was not the answer.
Due to some health issues, I have not been able to use my computer. Am just better enough to be back.
The committee still believes in allowing any unmodified (the RCPRO Club 40 rule is identical to the AMA rule) store bought prop. We also believe in being able to use any of the sport BB .40s that a person may have at home. We do believe that the TT .40 Pro is the "Best" engine for RCPRO Club 40 racing, but why would we want to force anyone to have to buy the "Best" engine, if they might want to give the event a try with a lesser engine? There are those who think tht some other engines are good enough, but it has been shown that those engines perform better with a slightly different prop than the "Best" engine.
Still, we know that, just as in AMA and Warbird racing, not everyone will choose to follow the national rules. We have seen people travell much greater distances to participate in RCPRO Club 40 events than originally anticipated. For those travelers, it would be nice if the rules were consistent, or, at least, differences from the national rules were spelled out in the fliers for the events.
Ken Erickson
At one time, there was an attempt to take an Advanced class (now called just RCPRO Club 40) engine and try to use it in the then Novice (now called RCPRO Club 40 Sport). A Super Tigre engine with an 11 X 4 prop was not the answer.
Due to some health issues, I have not been able to use my computer. Am just better enough to be back.
The committee still believes in allowing any unmodified (the RCPRO Club 40 rule is identical to the AMA rule) store bought prop. We also believe in being able to use any of the sport BB .40s that a person may have at home. We do believe that the TT .40 Pro is the "Best" engine for RCPRO Club 40 racing, but why would we want to force anyone to have to buy the "Best" engine, if they might want to give the event a try with a lesser engine? There are those who think tht some other engines are good enough, but it has been shown that those engines perform better with a slightly different prop than the "Best" engine.
Still, we know that, just as in AMA and Warbird racing, not everyone will choose to follow the national rules. We have seen people travell much greater distances to participate in RCPRO Club 40 events than originally anticipated. For those travelers, it would be nice if the rules were consistent, or, at least, differences from the national rules were spelled out in the fliers for the events.
Ken Erickson
09-01-2010, 09:12 AM
#18
My Feedback: (15)
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
That would be ok to do at our house Tim ( with me anyway) .
Hopefully the cooler weather and less humidity will have come to stay for a while as well at that time , maybe giving you a little better readings than taken during the heat of the summer ?
Tim, how easy is it to swap your telemetry system to another vehichle? Just curious and just thinking when you come to town .....?
Hopefully the cooler weather and less humidity will have come to stay for a while as well at that time , maybe giving you a little better readings than taken during the heat of the summer ?
Tim, how easy is it to swap your telemetry system to another vehichle? Just curious and just thinking when you come to town .....?
09-01-2010, 09:19 AM
#19
My Feedback: (15)
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
Hi Ken,
I hope that your health problems will be behind you now and I certainly wish you better health now [sm=thumbs_up.gif]
Just curious,... what kind of good, or bad things did you see when you tried the 11x4? Do you recall how the ST engine did with that prop? And was it with 15% fuel ( that seems to be the standard fuel being used at events now) or do you remember ? No problem if you dont.
Thanks for your reply, and best wishes from here in Birmingham,
John
I hope that your health problems will be behind you now and I certainly wish you better health now [sm=thumbs_up.gif]
Just curious,... what kind of good, or bad things did you see when you tried the 11x4? Do you recall how the ST engine did with that prop? And was it with 15% fuel ( that seems to be the standard fuel being used at events now) or do you remember ? No problem if you dont.
Thanks for your reply, and best wishes from here in Birmingham,
John
09-01-2010, 10:40 AM
#20
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
John,
The How Fast unit takes about five minutes to install. I use electrical tape to attach it to the wingtip. No other hookup is required for MAX MPH. If you want to measure at certain times, it needs to be connected to your landing gear channel of your receiver. We simply ran a long servo extension cable down the wing from the wingtip to the fuselage. This takes much longer as the extension must be fully taped down.
I can bring it to the race.
Tim
The How Fast unit takes about five minutes to install. I use electrical tape to attach it to the wingtip. No other hookup is required for MAX MPH. If you want to measure at certain times, it needs to be connected to your landing gear channel of your receiver. We simply ran a long servo extension cable down the wing from the wingtip to the fuselage. This takes much longer as the extension must be fully taped down.
I can bring it to the race.
Tim
09-01-2010, 01:57 PM
#23
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Columbus,
IN
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
Yes, sorry about that. I drifted off to the BB engines.
However, the very same logic, or illogic applies to RCPRO Club 40 Sport. The national rules allow a lot of engines. Most people think that the TT .42 GP is the cats meow, but here we have had some others stay right with it and some seem to get ahead. Unfortunately I have not been able to convince the club to have an actual race, but we do have a couple of members who will fly my planes and engines informally. There is one young fellow who has a Sky Raider with an FP he bought for $25.00. In the straight, he is faster than the TT .42!!!! The planes are using the same prop!!! If someone just told me that, I would not have believed it.
Ken Erickson
However, the very same logic, or illogic applies to RCPRO Club 40 Sport. The national rules allow a lot of engines. Most people think that the TT .42 GP is the cats meow, but here we have had some others stay right with it and some seem to get ahead. Unfortunately I have not been able to convince the club to have an actual race, but we do have a couple of members who will fly my planes and engines informally. There is one young fellow who has a Sky Raider with an FP he bought for $25.00. In the straight, he is faster than the TT .42!!!! The planes are using the same prop!!! If someone just told me that, I would not have believed it.
Ken Erickson
09-02-2010, 09:41 AM
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Willis,
TX
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
ORIGINAL: JohnMcGowan
Now having said that, what color socks were you wearing the day of the testing? I see no one has asked that question to you... heck, thats important to know!!!
Now having said that, what color socks were you wearing the day of the testing? I see no one has asked that question to you... heck, thats important to know!!!
09-02-2010, 09:56 AM
#25
My Feedback: (15)
RE: TT GP 42 prop data
Eric, I'll throw this out for you Texas guys too and invite you all to come to our event, even tho I realise how far it is.....but you ARE invited just the same
At least you'll eat good I think! Maybe we can put some Bama smackdown on yall? LOL