Light twins not using contra-rotating propellers

Stefan writes:

The most simple solution would be the possibility to trim all
three axis.

Hmm ... is trim in all three axes uncommon? The Baron has aileron,
elevator, and rudder trim.

On the more expensive level (much more expensive, I would guess), you
can overcome the P-factor effects by using two contra-rotating coaxial
propellors. This would not only overcome the effects of the P-factor,
but also those caused by torque. Kamov helicopters are an example of
such a design.

With a single powerplant turning in one direction, there would still
be some residual torque from the engine itself.

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

Neil Gould writes:

The question becomes which options a buyer might find more attractive,
for example would you prefer 3-axis trim or better avionics and moving
map GPS?

How about a three-axis autopilot with three-axis trim?

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

Steve Foley writes:

By your standards, are bicycles poorly designed because they are unstable at
slow speeds?

They aren't unstable at slow speeds.

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

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Steve Foley writes:

By your standards, are bicycles poorly designed because they are unstable
at
slow speeds?

They aren't unstable at slow speeds.

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

I see you know about as much about bicycles as you do about airplanes

Steve Foley writes:

I see you know about as much about bicycles as you do about airplanes

I think I know slightly more about airplanes, but I do know the basic
principles of bicycles.

--
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

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

There is no violation at all. Such twins are designed to take
advantage of the laws of physics.

Then the design defect of propellers that rotate in the same direction
is not a violation of the laws of physics, QED.

Your paraphrase is incorrect. It should be, "The design using propellers
that rotate in the same direction is not a defect".

Neil

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

The question becomes which options a buyer might find more
attractive, for example would you prefer 3-axis trim or better
avionics and moving map GPS?

How about a three-axis autopilot with three-axis trim?

On your salary? You must be joking.

Neil

Mxsmanic schrieb:

Hmm ... is trim in all three axes uncommon? The Baron has aileron,
elevator, and rudder trim.

We were talking about singles. Of course, you can always fly the baron
on one engine...

With a single powerplant turning in one direction, there would still
be some residual torque from the engine itself.

Yawn. You're talking to a former Moto Guzzi driver.

Stefan

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Steve Foley writes:

I see you know about as much about bicycles as you do about airplanes

I think I know slightly more about airplanes, but I do know the basic
principles of bicycles.


When you approach stop, a bicycle will fall over to one side or the other.
(unless yours still has training wheels).

- Note - MXX is intended as a flag to anyone wishing to block my responses
to Anthony.