Light twins not using contra-rotating propellers

Neil Gould writes:

It is a simple matter accounted for by Newtonian physics. Apparently, the
"designer" of that aspect of the real world doesn't see a problem with it,
as "real world version 2.0 has yet to be released, AFAIK.

It is more likely that nobody wants to pay to fix it.

BTW, pilots of propeller-driven aircraft don't see a problem with it either.

So if they had a choice between two otherwise identical aircraft, with
identical prices, they'd just flip a coin to choose between the one
with P-factor and torque and the one without?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

It is a simple matter accounted for by Newtonian physics.
Apparently, the "designer" of that aspect of the real world doesn't
see a problem with it, as "real world version 2.0 has yet to be
released, AFAIK.

It is more likely that nobody wants to pay to fix it.

Who (or what) is in the position to "fix" Real World 1.0 that couldn't
easily afford the cost?

BTW, pilots of propeller-driven aircraft don't see a problem with it
either.

So if they had a choice between two otherwise identical aircraft, with
identical prices, they'd just flip a coin to choose between the one
with P-factor and torque and the one without?

Sorry, I prefer the Real World, the one in which such choices are unlikely
and the market has chosen their preferences.

Neil

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

So if they had a choice between two otherwise identical aircraft, with
identical prices, they'd just flip a coin to choose between the one
with P-factor and torque and the one without?


I'd take the "P" factor airplane. It helps in controlling the airplane in
certain circumstances.

Karl
"Curator" N185KG

karl gruber writes:

I'd take the "P" factor airplane. It helps in controlling the airplane in
certain circumstances.

Hmm ... what sort of circumstances? It just seems like a nuisance to
me.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Every crosswind takeoff with wind from the right.............is one







"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
karl gruber writes:

I'd take the "P" factor airplane. It helps in controlling the airplane in
certain circumstances.

Hmm ... what sort of circumstances? It just seems like a nuisance to
me.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

karl gruber writes:

Every crosswind takeoff with wind from the right.............is one

But the wind is blowing from the right only half the time. What
happens when it is blowing from the left?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

karl gruber writes:

Every crosswind takeoff with wind from the right.............is one

But the wind is blowing from the right only half the time. What
happens when it is blowing from the left?

Take off in the other direction.

Roy Smith writes:

Take off in the other direction.

OK. What if it is blowing parallel to the runway?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:

karl gruber writes:


Every crosswind takeoff with wind from the right.............is one


But the wind is blowing from the right only half the time.


Where did you come up with that statistic? At my airport the wind blows
from the left probably over 90% of the time.

"Newps" wrote in message
...


Mxsmanic wrote:

karl gruber writes:


Every crosswind takeoff with wind from the right.............is one


But the wind is blowing from the right only half the time.


Where did you come up with that statistic? At my airport the wind blows
from the left probably over 90% of the time.

ROFL! Newps, my local patch suffers left crosswind about 10%. That
probably how the munchkin devolved his idiotic theory.