Pilatus PC9
 

Hey Guys,

I am really very new to the whole RC airplanes and I don't know much about anything to do with it really. I have played one of the RC simulators and I think I am getting used to the flying quite quickly. I have done a bit of flying myself (in real-size planes) and so I know how to fly, but I am not much of a handy man, so with this in mind I don't know what to buy. I was looking at the Cessna 182 trainer, but I think I would get bored with it before too long and what something more aerobatic. I was thinking maybe the PC9 or P51. I know they are fairly different planes... I would definitely be seeking instructor training before going solo, but I am just wondering how difficult would it be to put something like these planes together. Sorry that the planes I want are a bit radical but they're my favourites, amongst the Hawk 127 fighter trainer and F/A-18.

If the PC9 or P51 are not suitable AT ALL, then feel free to give suggestions, I am always open for comments or suggestions. I also think that if I have a little bit of trouble a local hobby shop would be more than happy to help me out right???

Cheers,
Kendall

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

By the way, if anyone has built a PC9 it would be really nice if you could please tell me how everything went, what was involved, etc.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

G'day Dale,
You said that you have flown full size aircraft, so you know how to fly, WRONG.
Find a club in Adelaide, talk to the members & find an instructor to help you, & DON'T try & fly a Cessna, or a PC9, they are not trainers, & you will CRASH.
You will need to relearn, everything about flying, because you are not in the plane, & you must rely on eye hand coordination, can take a while to come to grips with, or you may be a natural, either way forget those aerobatic planes, for a while.
As far as putting planes together, you will need help & advice with that too.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Hey thanks, I know I would need help.

The only thing to do with flying real planes is that I mean I get the concepts of like stalling back pressure while turning, taking-off, landing, etc. I am also aware that I would crash. Would it be suitable to get a PC9 or something of the likes and get an instructor to help me fly it, and slowly let me fly more and more?

Cheers,
Kendall

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

G'day Kendall,
Sorry about the name thing,
No a PC9, is low wing, fast & aerobatic, too much plane for a trainer, you need a high wing aircraft, but not a Cessna, one like a Skyraider Mk 1, about $120.00 with an OS 46AX or a Thunder Tiger, Pro 46, they are both the same price here in AUS, about $149.00 but I would stick to OS, you can't go wrong, & you can use it in your faster PC9, when you are ready for it.
Check out the Skyraider, in the Pic, it has a 46AX, & is my girlfriend's trainer, But be aware, I can fly the entire gold wings schedule with it, so you can learn aerobatics, with the same plane, again when you are ready.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Thanks Alan for your advice. Does the skyraider have to be built, if so how much? That is really good that I will be able to reuse the engine. I guess I'm going to have to find ones of similar size then. By the way I like the trainer with the subtle Extra 300S in the background :)

Also how would I go about getting introduced to building a kit plane?

Cheers,
Kendall

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

G'day Kendall,
The Skyraider Mk 1 is an ARF, takes a couple of days to put it together, approx, but you can be building your next plane, while learning to fly.
Also I don't know if you have a radio yet, but if not, go for at least 6 or 7 channels, computer of course.
The plane in the background, in that pic is a CMPro, 72" Katana, with an OS 160FX, not an Extra. It was mine. but now sadly deceased, due to battery failure, it had 6 servos & flew beautifully.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Hey,

Yeah I was definitely going to go and spend big money on the radio gear, as I want to eventually be flying a bigger scale turbine powered BAe Hawk, because of this I was going to invest in a 7+ channel radio. I know they're really expensive, but I'm going to have to buy something like that later anyway right? So why not get it now. Anyway I am taking up your idea of the OS .46, the one I was looking at is very powerful for its size (1.65hp) and is recommended for performance/aerobatic planes, so I can preserve it when learning to fly :) It's also only $180 (I was expecting more like $250+). Yeah since the trainer is relatively cheap, and so is the ARF .46 PC9, I was probably going to get the PC9 just after I had got the trainer and everything setup.

Another question, probably stupid. But for a plane that size what are the different types of servo's that are meant to be used for aileron, rudder, throttle, elevator and how much would I be looking at for them? Also for the PC9 I was hoping to down the track adjust it a little bit by adding retracts, would that be very difficult?

Cheers,
Kendall

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Kendall: I am a RC flying instructor here in the states. I've seen many people going through what you are trying to go through. It's not an easy sport to grasp mainly because of the hand-eye coordination training you have to go through. It's a mussle-memory thing that you learn by repeat actions. Also, it's a reaction time vs. recognition that you have to deal with. When a problem comes up, you have to deal with it immediately. Recognition of that problem takes some time to learn, to understand what's going on so you can correct it.

This just is not possible for a plane that travels at high speeds. Slow and steady is the key to learning and to prepare for what is to happen next. We try to make students understand that they have to learn to be about two or three steps ahead of the plane, to anticipate what is to happen and that takes some time to learn. It's not the same thing as being in the cockpit because you are on the ground and have a different perspective on the aircraft. It is going away from you, or coming toward you, passing by at altitude, and so on. Then there is the learning curve for the approach and landing, then what to do if the engine quits (dead stick) while flying. It all takes some time to learn and understand and to anticipate what is going to happen under certain conditions and reacting to it.

Allan is absolutely correct in what he says. Learning on the simulator is a good thing, but add that to the hands-on experience with actual flying with an instructor on a buddy box (so he can anticipate your next move and help you correct it, show you how to correct it, and so on).

And of course that really is not possible with a fast aircraft. Sure, you may get bored with a slower flying trainer, but it's better to be bored than to spend a lot of time and money either repairing or replacing that fast aircraft you crashed while trying to learn to fly it. I would predict that you would not get bored, but disappointed and simply drop the sport altogether which is not a good thing. Get a good trainer, something like Allan suggested, or go to your local club field and talk to the instructors and see what they recommend, and do what they say. You will be much happier in the long run. You will probably end up keeping that trainer and going back to it from time to time for some relaxing easy flying on a Sunday afternoon. We all to that, and I fly some interesting, aerobatic, and fast aircraft.

Best of luck.

DS.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Cheers, but I'm fairly sure that I did agree to getting that trainer. Yes I am still going to get the OS engine, but just because it's a good engine, doesn't mean I have to go full-throttle everywhere. I understand that I need to learn to fly first, and I am DEFINITELY going to do it SLOWLY!!! AS, like you said, I don't particularly want to make it into a money pit! I am going to get a trainer with a .46 OS engine. Then when I think I am reasonable at flying, I shall pull out the PC9 and learn with that, but until then, I will be looking at getting a trainer. Like I've said I think I have picked up on the Sim pretty quick, and I know it's different to real flying but I feel that I will pick up on the flying relatively quickly as well, with the aid of an instructor. As it is a trainer, it is designed to create a huge amount of lift, therefore reducing the amount of speed required to counteract the weight forces, because of this I will not need to use the engine to its fullest, and still be able to fly slowly with the instructor. But it also means that when I get comfortable with the aircraft, I will be able to step it up, without changing the aircraft. So I believe that this is a really good thing to do. Trainer capable of going slow, engine capable of going faster, as my skill progresses. Right?

Cheers,
Kendall

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Absolutely.

Don't get me wrong, the SIM is a great way to practice. If you do crash with it, you simply hit the space bar and you're all recovered ready to fly again... ;) which is a good thing. I use my sim all the time when the weather is bad and often, just to 'fly around' as though I was sport flying at the field.

I do aerobatics, Pattern flying, and use the sim to work on my form and stick control with various maneuvers. It's a great way to both learn and to practice with.

Best of luck. Let us know when you get going and how you progress.

DS.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Here's what you should do (the numbers are probably different overseas)

Plane: Get yourself a Seagull boomerang 40 (not the 60). It will fly great with an 46 AX up front. The boomerang first is Australian secondly is really stable can slow down past a crawl before is stalls and when your ready will allow you to do some aerobatics including rolls, loops, stall turns and spins (3 is my record on the boomerang), snap rolls and even short hovers with an AX up front.

Engine: OS 46 AX reliable, powerful and all round great engine and once you've graduated from your boomerang it'll go straight into a PC-9.

Radio Gear: If you are looking for a 7 channel go with the JR XP7202. Its 7 channel, synthesized (no more crystals and fighting over channels) and has a whole load of programming features. In the long run you could fly a jet off of it but if you are going to spend so much on a jet in the first place its worth while to upgrade to something like the X-10 but the XP7202 will keep you happy for a long time.

Servos: Just use the servos that come with the radio. From memory these are digital and fairly high torque so you wont have a problem with these. Its kinda stupid having a digital high torque servo powering your carburetor barrel but its worth it just to keep everything the same. Your boomerang will need 4 servos 1 for aileron, elevator, rudder and engine and the PC-9 needs 5 with 1 for each aileron.

PC-9: The PC-9 is another great plane and once your confident with your trainer you should be able to fly one with ease. They go together as simply as the boomerang (epoxy the wing halves together, epoxy in the stabilizers, install the fuel tank and engine and install your radio gear) and the only other thing that you will need to buy to get one in the air is a 5th servo. Do not get one of these to start though they are not as forgiving and a lot faster than the boomerang and when you are learning with an instructor or not this is a recipe for disaster.

You may have picked it up on the sim pretty quickly but just imagine the amount of money you would have spent if you had to pay for every single one of your crashes and i can almost guarantee you that you have picked up some bad habits along the way. Hopefully your instructor will pick up on these quickly and fix them so then you can get back to flying on the simulator after learning the good habits since practice really does make perfect.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Cheers heaps for the good advice trundle.

I was wanting the 46 AX OS engine. Thanks for the hints with the servos, controller, plane, engine. Much appreciated!

Cheers,
Kendall

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

No problem happy to help. ;)

couple things i forgot though

Retracts: If you are gonna stick retracts in your PC-9 be prepared to rip the wing and the forward fuselage apart and have the know how to build the whole thing back again. Since its an ARF they really don't give a crap wether you want to do mods on it or not. The way they do it is cheap and thats all they care about. You have to pay the price though when your cutting balsa and covering away and this may leave a few scars in your plane.

Clubs: I don't know if you've thought of this yet but make sure that you join a club. Some people moan and whine about it costing extra but if you have an big accident with your plane, injure someone (or worse) or damage their property they are going to want you to pay for it and unfortunately you are the one who will pay for it. I know this sounds stupid but it could result in you losing your house or car. Also i don't know exactly how it works in SA since i think we are all different but in WA if you join a club you get access to free instruction by volunteers who give up their weekends and flying hours to teach newbies. The only drawback with this is that considering they are volunteers you cant say when you want instructed and you may be placed in a queue but its well worth it since the vast majority of them are extremely helpful, great flyers and all round nice people (they are volunteers after all). So go down to your nearest field and find out about this sort of stuff before you buy anything unless you already have of course.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Hey thanks again, yeah I went into a hobby shop in Sydney the other day just to have a look around, and I was speaking to a guy who said that I would have to join a club, so I was definitely going to look into it at least, and since there is one near my house (5-10 min drive) then I was going to have a look for sure.

Cheers,
Kendall

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Hi

I test flew a pc 9 for somone can't remember now witch, some artf one i think a .53 engine, i trimmed it out and it seemed ok. Gave it to the owner to fly who had reasonable flying ability, didn't really think there was any need for a buddy box, He didn't fly it for long before he crashed it clearly through pilot error.

I guess it was just to fast/ manouverable for him to cope with.

I suggest you really become competent with a trainer and a suitable second plane, before attempting to fly such a plane.

I think in general people try to move on to quickly, i still enjoy throwing a trainer around even though i can fly most types of planes.

Simon

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Cheers for the advice.

If the PC9 is probably too advanced for a second plane, then can I ask what do you recommend as a second? I also like the P-51...?

Cheers,
Kendall

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Hi

A p51 is to advanced to.

I think there are many options for second planes look for somthing that:

has a light wing loading
has a constant chord wing (not tapered) ideally semi symetrical with some dihedral but not as much as a trainer.
not scale as you want somthing thats easy to mend.

Simon

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

G'day Kendall,
I know you won't want to read this, but a warbird, eg P51, Spitfire, etc, is still too much, there are heaps of low wing ideal 2nd planes around.
A good one is the Kyosho Calmato, low wing trainer, very nice plane to put together & to fly.
The same motor, & radio gear will work a treat in the Calmato, another good one, is the Skyraider Mk 2, it has great features, is a joy to fly & it is cheap, but not nasty, again the same motor & radio will be great in it.
Check out the pix, the Blue one is the Calmato, The yellow one is a Skyraider Mk 2. With a Mk 1 in the background.
I have maidened both of these planes & they are both great.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

m8 why don't your stop over-analysing and just start doing? Dip your feet in the water, then you'll have a better practical idea of what we're all talking about.

A simulator is a training aid which when used correctly, can accelerate the learning curve. It doesn't replace good instruction or flying the real thing.

Measure twice, cut once. Learn first, and SHOW us how good you are later.

What you want to start is a TWM Sky Raider Mach I & O.S. 46LA & stick an 11X5 APC on it. Unbeatable training combo which will take you beyond the first step. KISS is the smartest way to learn, and the fastest way to progress. The 46LA has sufficient power to fly the sportsman pattern when flown with the intellect instead the ego. Alternatively, although smaller with all that encompasses, a Kyosho Calmato or Seagull Boomerang 40 with a 40LA, or 46LA if you must, is also a good combo. 10.5 x 5 Bolly works best for purpose on the 40 in the average sized trainer airframe.

The ball raced 46's such as the O.S. AX or TT PRO are simply too powerful & fast to effectively teach and learn on even in an airframe the size of the SRM1. I'd like to personally gut every #$@! who suggests them as the ideal first engine for the consequent nuisances to blast mindlessly around the sky focussed in a situational awareness bubble the size of a peanut shell 2 seconds behind the model annoyiing the %$*! out of actual capable flyers.

Forget the glam & PC-9 until you don't need to ask the question. And no, it's not really a smart choice for second model either.

Sky Raider II (box with wings) is a great flying sport model, and a 46LA powers it very nicely. That combo would be a smart choice for your second model. When you really have it mastered with the LA, stick a ball raced AX in it and it becomes a bullet capable of unlimited vertical.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Thank you very much for your blunt honesty!!! Much appreciated!

Well I am still doing my research as I am only new to the idea of RC airplanes, so sorry for my ignorance, maybe even stupidity around this area.

Well I'll definitely be looking at getting into the sport as soon as I can, cheers for all your help!

I think the reasons behind this thread being opened are solved so could a moderator please close the thread now?!?!?!

Cheers

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

I don't know what the winds are like over in SA but in Perth they can get pretty strong and unpredictable. You may take off in your boomerang which is powered by a 46LA in a breeze and before you know it at full throttle you are standing still or flying backwards! This has happened quite a few times to me and for the extra $40 or so it is well worth getting the AX so then at least you can get some ground speed. If you don't need the power when your learning simply throttle back it doesn't take a genius. For that tiny price difference its well worth getting an overpowered plane that you can throttle back than an adequately powered plane that cant give you bursts of power when you need it. It's especially worth it when you buy yourself an LA, get bored with the power then you have to fork out another $140 to get yourself a new engine. And as I've said before it'll go straight into your second plane wether it be a PC-9, scanner or something similar. If you ask me you are doing the right thing by "over analyzing" This way you can get everyones opinion then figure it out for yourself and hopefully not blow all your money on something you are going to want to replace in the near future. If you jump into the hobby not knowing this stuff then you are almost certainly going to blow your money on some "great deal" that is offered at your local hobby shop.

On your second plane I have had no problems flying my PC-9. I've only been flying for around 6 months myself and i took it up for its maiden myself. I even had a deadstick having no idea about how this thing is going to handle at low speeds but luckily if you flare it will come down to a crawl allowing you to touch down on the back then the front for a beautiful landing. A P-51 or any other war bird is defiantly a 3rd plane. Tail draggers are a lot harder to handle on the ground and most of then have strange wings that don't produce a lot of lift and generally are a pain to fly.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Shhh...that's what I was going to do anyway :) Yeah, I understand that I can half throttle a plane or whatever, not just full-throttle. As I want a PC9, this is also why I wanted the AX model, as it would be good in a later plane!

I know tail draggers are a pain, because they are a pain in full size!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I hate tail draggers [:@]

Cheers

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

i really like my simulator. The FS ONE is great. I used that before ever flying a plane and got lucky with an instructor that lets me use his plane with a buddy box. I knew I wanted to fly but really didn't realize how bad I would get the fever. I can't wait to get my plane next week. My trainer swears I have flown before but I keep telling him it is the simulator. However, I have not even attempted to take off or land yet. I have noticed in the simulator though it is very challenging. I am hoping it is because it is hard to get your bearing straight on the monitor compared to the outdoors and actually being able to see everything in front of you.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Hey,

Well if you're finding it difficult to take-off and land in the simulator, then I must not be doing too bad then, since I've flown a total of about 10-20 minutes and I can take-off and land in a BAE Hawk, powered by a turbine in the simulator, amongst other planes...

Cheers

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Nice in theory, but flawed in practice, it simply doesn't work for the average stud. That people struggle through and learn despite it is the miracle, more often than not a case of the blind being led by the blind. It's easy to pick 'em out shortly after solo. They're the ones who need someone to buy them a throttle servo.

Student performance isn't proportional to sheer intelligence. Flying, be it full size or RC, is a demonstrated competency thing, which in a large degree has to be learned by repetition and facilitate by using the best tools to ensure success and rapid assimilate at a pace with which they can cope with mistakes and reinforce success, which the 46AX isn't.

Even basic semi-competent throttle management requires awareness translated into action. It takes time literally and figuratively for students to react and learn this until it becomes anticipative rote. Excessive power or speed don't assist the assimilation curve. They detract from it. You lose half the effective teaching period of their useful concentration span in the air perpetually telling them to slow the model down because the model is ahead of them and exacerbating their problems, then waiting for them to hear you after you've said it for the fifth time because they're still load shedding under stress trying to catch up mentally with the model .... before they "Oh', just a minute I've got to turn again" eventually action it.

And this ultimately is the root cause of the problem dressed up as economic justification. A false premise, because the inevitible consequence is that everyone buys more than one engine if they continue, and within the first few months. But more importantly, the huge $$$$ saving ammassed by flying within one's capability as they learn which is complimented by the 46LA in the first important confidence & experience gaining months, easily comes out way ahead in cash terms versus any preceived bigger pie for just a few pennies more misperceived "better value" triage. Dunno' how the morons who can't figure that out can stand the crash and replace dash for cash, let alone having to put an new ARF together every week!

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

no it is easy to land...i mean the looks on the monitor kill me when setting up...lol

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

G'day Kendall,
Allan here again, I only have taildraggers, 1 apprentice, 1 Senior telemaster, 1 livewire champ, 1 Diabolo, 1 Sportsmaster, 1 Giles 202, & I had a Katana, all taildraggers. They are the best, when you learn how to take off & land.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

most of the reason for me not landing is we have been have 25 - 35 mph wind gust crosswinds..so it has been a bear flying as it is

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

G'day Sigrun,
Where is it written that one must extract every last rev out of an engine, we run an OS 46AX, with an APC 12x6, & a Taipan green plug, my girlfriend flys it, in her Skyraider mk1, at half throttle, & even at full throttle it is still very controllable, the motor don't care, it is always a first flick, against compression start, & runs sweet.
Come to our field sometime & we'll show ya.
Here it is at Armidale last year, that is her plane at the home page, & we are not even members,
http://nemac.com.au/

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

man that has to suck having to wait until Sunday to fly...or did i misread that... we can fly everyday at our club. www.hawksrc.org really nice field...even enough room to fly the smaller turbines... have to the bigger ones over to the airport

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Thanks for that.

For all those disputing whether or not it is a good idea to get an 'overpowered' engine, I honestly don't care about this particular one, because it is not that overpowered, and I understand that as soon as you have enough speed to get off the ground, you've got enough speed to back off to at least 3/4 throttle, and probably 1/2 at altitude...like I said earlier, I do know how to fly, and for any actual plane pilots reading this, should understand, that it would come more naturally as they understand better what the plane is going to do as they have probably made the mistakes/done the same movements in learning how to fly...

Cheers for all the advice everyone!

Kendall

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

3/4, 1/2 throttle on a boomerang? bah!

The boomerang is just a big glider with an optional engine in the front. When i got my wings i was messing around in it i pulled the throttle all the way back to idle put in full up elevator and with the headwind that i had at the time i stayed perfectly stationary. You could even do spirals to put in into a slow descent.

At my field we can fly any day of the week but we share it with different clubs. Unfortunately though during the week people like to come down on the weekdays for some really "relaxed" flying and don't bother to stick their radio tags in and generally do illegal flying. But my club is talking about getting a new field now with a main 200mx20m runway! It will almost be impossible to miss.

field: http://www.wamasc.org.au/

club: www.boomerangswa.org

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

G'day Mate,
That club is in Armidale, about 5 hours drive away from where we are, the pic just happened to show up on their front page.
We can fly every day of the week here too except for Saturdays during summer, because of the cricket.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

Where is it implied, but more importantly, what is it that deceives you to believe that's what a 46LA needs to do? :eek:

Alan if you truly believe it's necessary to "extract every last rev out of a 46LA" in ab initio training, or performing the Gold Wings manoeuvres consecutively, or even the Sportsman pattern with a model weighing just 5¼lb with 775in² of wing area, then (a) you're never used the 46LA, certainly not in a Sky Raider Mach I, and (b) your belief system is as flawed as your understanding of aerodynamics, engine & propellor theory and resolution of the balance of forces, with specific regard to understanding the purpose of excess power available vs power required, how it's determined and purpose it serves.

And your point is what exactly Alan? "very controllable"? Every well designed model is "very controllable". It's just that it needs capable 'driver' on the other end, the salient point you either errantly or inadvertantly overlook. Bottom line is that the LA performs with the same user friendliness and reliability as the AX, but delivers only about 70% of the AX's power at 60% of the AX's price. Bang for the buck, or superior for purpose, for training and that first and second model, LA wins hands down. If you've seen one perform in a Sky Raider Mach II or similar, you'd understand that the engine is <understatement> very capable and has considerably in excess of "power required" both for the task, and as much as your wannabe' space cadet can competently handle when put to the test.

But m8, I'm pleased for you & your grlfriend. OK? No...truly....I am [sm=tongue_smile.gif]

The AX is a reliable, powerful sport engine engine no argument. It's just not an recommended first engine, and definitely not an ideal training engine. The reasons why are known to those with a clue about considerations in teaching and learning in the dynamic 'classroom', and should be to those who are actually as smart as they like to think they are if you read my former post. After you have, if you still don't understand, go and drop circa AUD$10k on a real CASA instructor rating, do the study, prep & deliver the briefs, pass the exams & flight tests, but don't forget to get the minimum of a CPL first, then progress through GR3, 2 & 1, do the hard yards in GA before you achieve RPT and eventually become a checkie, + etc, spend a 30 years in professional and sport aviation including aeromodelling, and then we'll talk some more on the subject when a semblance of understanding might prevail. MAAA toy 'rating'. Yer, got one of those too. Use it often. And...the pamphlet D E S P E R A T E L Y needs re-writing.

No matter what you might choose to believe, a 12x 6 is too large a prop for the 46AX to swing for it to"run sweet". About all that marvel represents is testimony to the idiot-proofness of the engine. That's just the math. Nothing to do with opinion.

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

G'day Mate,
Who said anything about a Boomerang?

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

So tell us all Kendall, apart from in your imagination, how many hours of actual air experience have you logged? What CASA licence/s & ratings do you hold? :)

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

G'day Mate,
Quote" No matter what you might choose to believe, a 12x 6 is too large a prop for the 46AX to swing for it to"run sweet".

Have you ever tried it? We do almost every weekend, runs sweet.
OS state that a 46 AX can swing up to a 12x7,

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

G'day Alan,

Will the AX thow a 12 x 7 = yes. Runs "sweet"? Let's just agree that you and I have different interpretations of the non-quantitative approbation "sweet". With a 12 x 7, the 46AX is so far out of it's it's optimum RPM band the way it's ported and intended to be run, the sacrifice of power through engine inefficiency is such that you may as well be running the LA instead and saving weight and money. [sm=cry_smile.gif]

But as long as you're happy with it. :eek:

RE: Pilatus PC9
 

What is the best size prop for the 46AX?