Stupid hp to thrust question

In article , nafod40
writes:


Does a prop turning at 2300 rpm on a 150hp motor produce more thrust than a
prop spinning 2300 rpm on a 100 hp motor ?

To paraphrase the question...

If I put 150 lbs of crap in a 100 lb bag, and 150 lbs of crap in a 150
lb bag, which bag is holding more crap?



Damn BOb, you sure are full of CRAP! ;-)))))

Bob Reed
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Whoa, Bob.

You have corn-fused me with somebody that gives a CRAP.
Neither my dog or I would care to be involved in this blivet* fiasco.

* blivet

/bliv'*t/ n. [allegedly from a World War II military term
meaning "ten pounds of manure in a five-pound bag"]


Barnyard BOb - -
The more people I meet,
the more I love my dog
and George Carlin humor.

"Russell Kent" wrote in message
...

Not so fast. If my eyes aren't deceiving me, the only change you made was
"contains" for "holds". English being an exceptionally slippery language,
it
seems to me that those terms are synonymous. Makes it rather hard to give
a
definitive answer to the original poster's question if we aren't clear on
whether "hold/contains" means "at the moment" or "at maximum capacity",
which I
believe is the issue that nafod40 was attempting to illustrate with his
posting. I was only trying to show that nafod40's choice of numbers
weren't
quite parallel to the original poster's question.

BTW, there's entirely too much crap in here. :-)

ob. aviation content: My Dad used to drop blivets from the B-52 he flew.
:-)

Slippery? I won't go there. :^P

But I think "contains" is much more appropriate than "holds". Example - In
front of you are two empty sacks; one of 150 lbs capacity (assuming standard
crap mass/weight/volume/specific gravity) and another of 100 lbs capacity.
Which one "holds" more? Which one contains more? There's no correct answer -
it's just my opinion and probably stinks.

Aviation reply - No wonder the N. Vietnamese hated the Bee 52!!! Would that
be a weapon of Mass Corruption?

Rich S.

Bob Reed wrote:

Damn BOb, you sure are full of CRAP! ;-)))))

I'm sure NO ONE here, not even the crotchety old fool himself, will deny that BOb
is full of crap (sometimes), *BUT* it was nafod40 whom you (Bob Reed) quoted and
not BOb.

Russell Kent
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When I go blind from one too many Muzzleloaders....
You can officially be my replacement eyes on RAH...
and in the RV-3, if you don't mind sitting on my lap.

Thank you, Russell.
Good job. g


Barnyard BOb --

"Rich S." wrote:

But I think "contains" is much more appropriate than "holds". Example - In
front of you are two empty sacks; one of 150 lbs capacity (assuming standard
crap mass/weight/volume/specific gravity) and another of 100 lbs capacity.
Which one "holds" more? Which one contains more? There's no correct answer -
it's just my opinion and probably stinks.

On this we vigorously agree: there's no correct answer. And I think, no, I'm
*certain* that was the point that nafod40 was attempting to make. My only point
of contention involved his particular sequence of numbers.

Aviation reply - No wonder the N. Vietnamese hated the Bee 52!!! Would that
be a weapon of Mass Corruption?

Actually, Dad said they carried and dropped "concrete blivets" out in some
bombing range out West. He also dropped real iron bombs over various parts of
S.E. Asia, but I never heard him say anything about dropping blivets, concrete
or otherwise, there. But you never know. There was some conversation about
ferrying the wing commander's Volkswagon (IIRC) in the bomb bay once during an
extended training deployment...

Russell Kent

In article , RR Urban
writes:



Bob Reed wrote:

Damn BOb, you sure are full of CRAP! ;-)))))

I'm sure NO ONE here, not even the crotchety old fool himself, will deny
that BOb
is full of crap (sometimes), *BUT* it was nafod40 whom you (Bob Reed) quoted
and
not BOb.

Russell Kent
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When I go blind from one too many Muzzleloaders....
You can officially be my replacement eyes on RAH...
and in the RV-3, if you don't mind sitting on my lap.

Thank you, Russell.
Good job. g


Barnyard BOb --



What can I say, everything was browned out, the smell was overwhelming and I
screwed up! It's been one of those days, weeks, months, years, whatever, I
screwed up and you are not full of crap after all.


XLAX to the rescue!!!!!!




Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

On 08 Dec 2003 03:14 PM, RobertR237 posted the following:

When I go blind from one too many Muzzleloaders....
You can officially be my replacement eyes on RAH...
and in the RV-3, if you don't mind sitting on my lap.

Thank you, Russell.
Good job. g


Barnyard BOb --



What can I say, everything was browned out, the smell was overwhelming
and I screwed up! It's been one of those days, weeks, months, years,
whatever, I screwed up and you are not full of crap after all.


XLAX to the rescue!!!!!!

No need to go bringing that dumbass back to the newsgroup. Besides, I
think that BOb likes his RV spars just the way they are.

----------------------------------------------------
Del "old troll week" Rawlins

Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

In article , nafod40 says...

To paraphrase the question...

If I put 150 lbs of crap in a 100 lb bag, and 150 lbs of crap in a 150
lb bag, which bag is holding more crap?


Depends...

Chuck S

"Mark" wrote in message
...
Hi All, thanks for the responses, was not meant to be a trick question but
definately a newbie question. I was curious after reading about people
using
mazda 13b engines for various homebuilts, and porting them, adding on
various components to boost the hp from 200 to 260+. Seems at a point that
it's overkill if the 200 hp engine is going to provide you with the
needed
ponies and rpms to accomplish the same as the 260 hp engine. What would
the
advantge be of having the extra horsepower ?

Thanks,

Mark


"Mark" wrote in message
...
Does a prop turning at 2300 rpm on a 150hp motor produce more thrust
than
a
prop spinning 2300 rpm on a 100 hp motor ?




Mark,

A "typical" 13b (non-turbocharged) for aircraft is closer to 180-200 Hp.
A turbo will get you to that 250 hp mark, if you need it. Without the right
prop, the power is not usable.


Phillip

On 8 Dec 2003 20:06:47 -0800, ChuckSlusarczyk
wrote:

In article , nafod40 says...

To paraphrase the question...

If I put 150 lbs of crap in a 100 lb bag, and 150 lbs of crap in a 150
lb bag, which bag is holding more crap?

Depends...

How much crap does your Depends hold? :-)

Ron Wanttaja

"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news
In article ,
"Eric Miller" wrote:

"RobertR237" wrote in message
...
PS: This is a simple answer to your question but many factors are
involved.
The effort to increase a 200 hp engine to 260 hp may or may not be
worth
the
effort and the 30% increase in hp wil not produce an equilivent
increase
in
thrust or speed. I don't remember the formula for calculating the
increase but
it is far less than anticipated.

Speed increases at about the cube root of the HP increase, so:

(260 / 200) ^ (1 / 3) = 1.091 or about 9% faster with 30% more HP

But other factors to consider are the increased weight of a larger
engine,
the increased fuel burn, and the weight of that fuel.

Eric



Extra horsepower converts directly into rate of climb, assuming the same
weight and airspeed. Fuel consumption rises approximately in proportion
to horsepower; stability decreases.

Other factors in boosting phenomenal horsepower out of small packages:

Increased thermal load
Increased stress on all parts of the engine
Some high RPM ranges may not yield usable thrust because the prop tips
are in the transonic range, where prop efficiency decreases greatly.

And in the case of a rotary, you WILL be spinning the engine around 6000 or
so RPM. This means you must also use a PSRU to drop the RPM down to
something usable for the prop. The nice thing is, 6000 shaft RPM is only
2000 rotor RPM. The 13b can handle 6-8 grand with no problems.

Phillip