In alt.usenet.kooks on Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:02:00 -0400, david
hillstrom wrote:

On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 09:58:48 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

"Lonnie" @_#~#@.^net wrote in :


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

Oh i don't see any change. Toothpicks have, by far, been the most
common props on lightplanes for years and not without good reason.
I'm not arguing that. But it depends on a lot of things. A lot of
turboprops have relatively wide chord scimitar props, for instance.
My point was really more directed towards the sentiment that
efficiency shoud be described in such narrow terms. Most people want
an airplane to go from A-B real fast and burn as little fuel as
possible, but that doesn't mean that it's nore efficient than an
airplane that excelles in some other way..



Bertie

And all your input has had zip **** to do with "Silent Super Efficient
Propellers".

Actually, it does.


Quit rattling your empty head. You're starting to sound like Anthony
again.


Yeh, right wannabe boi..

Bertie

heres a story for you airplane heads from an electrical engineer.

i used to work for Black & Decker years ago. and once we did an
experiment with a certain tool for marketing. one tool had the normal
not so efficient fan in it, and the other had a super quiet high
efficiency fan in it that actually allowed about 25% more runtime off
the battery, including a bit more power.

we took them out into the field for user comparison. ~every~ ~single~
~person~ we did the comparison with thought the louder, less efficient
tool was more powerful BECAUSE OF THE NOISE. even though they were
dead wrong, thats what they thought, and thats how they bought their
tools.

my 2 cents

If you build a LOUD version of Usenet, they will come.



--
PJR :-)
slrn newsreader (v0.9.9): http://slrn.sourceforge.net/
extra slrn documentation: http://slrn-doc.sourceforge.net/
newsgroup name validator: http://pjr.lasnobberia.net/usenet/validator