"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:
"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
.. .
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:
"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
.. .
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:
snort ...you -are- a piece of work indeed...
--Gord.
"Bull ****! This is a constant speed prop. RPM is a
set value. The RPM can be set at 3000 and the
manifold pressure can be anywhere between 15 inches
and 61 inches, and it's the manifold pressure
combined with the set RPM that will determine the
power.....NOT the RPM!!! Are you trying to tell
me that the rotational (energy) of a propeller is
the same at 15 inches as it is at 61?".
-D Henriques
Correct as always!
1. Manifold pressure and rpm equal power
2. The rotational energy of a 24D50 is less at 15 inches than it is at
61
if
the power is brought back past the high rpm limiter.
Simple! Since the limiter is physically impossible to eliminate from
the
statement, it's existence and function is assumed.
Is there something about all this you don't understand? :-))
DH
Poor Dudley sigh
I notice that "poor Dudley" doesn't address constant speed prop governor
high rpm limiter does it Gordo? Com'on, you can do better than this can't
you? After all, you have 26 years experience dealing with these things.
Go
on; tell me how the seizure momentum is the same at 15 inches as it is at
61?
and oh yes, let's not forget;
"Bull ****! This is a constant speed prop. RPM is a
set value. The RPM can be set at 3000 and the
manifold pressure can be anywhere between 15 inches
and 61 inches, and it's the manifold pressure
combined with the set RPM that will determine the
power.....NOT the RPM!!! Are you trying to tell
me that the rotational (energy) of a propeller is
the same at 15 inches as it is at 61?".
-D Henriques
Waiting for your answer on seizure! :-)
Oh God...what an unmitigated fool you are sir...you're even worse
than JT pretends to be, he at least is just yanking chains for
fun. You really have convinced yourself that you're right even
though you've been told by several that you're not. It does no
good to prove to you that you're in error because you just
obfuscate until nobody can tell what you believe.
I'm quite done with you now. Goodnight.
--
-Gord.
Is THIS how you deal with a request to engage in a dialog on engine seizure
and rotational force? :-))))))
Seems a bit lacking in content don't you think?
Here. I'll give you an opening for one of your "windbag" answers
:-)
Keep in mind old buddy, that what I'm writing here is as much for other
readers as it is for you personally, so don't think I'm going to all this
trouble just for you :-)))
I'll make it simple for you. Since I'm writing it here, it can't be changed
by me at any time and as such can't be "obfuscated" as you like to say.
" When you bring the power back on a P51 Mustang from cruise with the prop
set at a median cruise setting such as 2500RPM, the rotational force of the
prop if the engine seizes at idle power (using 15 inches with normal air
loads on the prop) will be LESS, not the same, as it would have been had the
engine seized at the cruise setting; due to the prop exceeding the high rpm
stop on the governor as it tries to maintain the constant speed setting as
the power comes back to idle, thus reducing the RPM, which is the
determining factor for rotational force" Therefore, it is entirely proper to
say that the rotational velocity (force) of this prop will be less at 15
inches than it is at 61 inches.
I realize you're having trouble understanding this, but here it is AGAIN in
black and white. Perhaps some of those people who agree with you on this
would care to comment. I can't make it any more open and available for
dissent than I have right here.
Now, either confirm this as being true or false with your countering
explanation, or copy and paste the EXACT post you say you made to me to
"explain" all this to me because I didn't know it.
Fair enough?
You know, I think this "being right" thing might mean a lot more to you than
it does to me. I honestly think you might have a problem being in too deep
in this and you simply can't respond at this point. That's why you keep
posting all this useless bull**** while evading me on the issue. I'll play
this game with you without using any personal attack response if possible
and see if I can get you to respond in a normal manner and deal with the
issue itself rather than who's right and who's wrong.
This is Usenet fella. Nobody cares if I'm right or you're right, or even
who's wrong. I'm giving you every opportunity to respond to the issue and
get away from the personal attack mode you constantly use with me. I could
just ignore you, but you interest me for some unknown reason. I don't mind
the insults. They're amusing really. My personal email on our little
difference of opinion is highly in favor of ignoring you I might add.
Anyone who knows me doesn't need to be convinced about the information I
give on Usenet. Hell, I've been posting around here for years. I think I
understand your problem with this thing. You feel that I'm some idiot pilot
who didn't respond to your explanation about rotational forces and props.
Problem is, you entered a thread under me with this "lecture" of yours and
you forgot the prop limiter. I can't help that. It isn't my problem. My
problem is that I went about two posts with you in that thread before I
realized you didn't have a clue about the limiter. Now you're in too deep
with all this posting of quotes that you think makes your case. Hell man,
don't you realize by now that I don't give a hoot who thinks I know this
about that and who doesn't.
I'm not your enemy but I am having some fun with you FWIW. If you're right,
engage me on the issue. Then there will be no doubt will there? But don't
just post all this bull crap. Take me on! Don't be afraid. I won't bite you!
Let's talk props, not "obfuscation"!! What more can I do? Tell me!! Hell,
I'm asking you to take me on in a public forum. Do you actually think I
would give you such an open opportunity if I was afraid of the outcome?
Think man....think!!!! :-)
I'll tell you this Gordo. It's you who keeps posting under me with all this
crap....not me posting under you. I have the choice to respond or ignore
you. I've chosen to engage politely in response.The more you flame around
with this thing the nicer I'm going to be:-) If you keep posting the
personal remarks and evading the issue, I'll just keep prodding you to
respond. Sooner or later you'll either take the friendly challenge or stop
all this foolishness of yours.
I'll tell you this also. I'm not trying to prove you wrong either. I know
you know props. You just inserting yourself under me before your brain is
engaged. I've done it myself, so don't feel bad.
Com'on Gordo.....isn't there ANYTHING I can do or say that will get you to
openly discuss this prop thing with me? I promise I'll keep trying as long
as you keep posting to me in the manner you have chosen.
and let's not forget..........
"Bull ****! This is a constant speed prop. RPM is a
set value. The RPM can be set at 3000 and the
manifold pressure can be anywhere between 15 inches
and 61 inches, and it's the manifold pressure
combined with the set RPM that will determine the
power.....NOT the RPM!!! Are you trying to tell
me that the rotational (energy) of a propeller is
the same at 15 inches as it is at 61?".
-D Henriques
So which is it gonna be tonight Gordo, an answer dealing with the issue, or
just another "God, what a windbag" post? Your choice
:-))
DH
|