A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Shortened McCauley Propeller on an O-300



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 9th 03, 02:49 PM
Larry Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Shortened McCauley Propeller on an O-300

A year or so ago there was a thread about shortened aluminum prop blades,
especially on Sensenich props, going into flutter and departing O-320's.
And I recall that Rich Shankland decided not to use the bargain prop he had
bought for his Emeraude.

Now here's an aluminum McCauley which was originally 76" and is now 75.188.
In other words 13/32" have been removed from each blade, reducing its
diameter by 13/16".

It seems ac 43.13A, McCauley, or the tcds ought to say something about this
and the limits a prop may be shortened but I haven't found it yet. Anybody
know if this prop would be legal on a certified aircraft with a Continental
O-300? Or can direct us to the pertinent specs?
Thanks.


Ads
  #2  
Old September 9th 03, 03:48 PM
Cy Galley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What is the prop Model?
"Larry Smith" wrote in message
...
A year or so ago there was a thread about shortened aluminum prop blades,
especially on Sensenich props, going into flutter and departing O-320's.
And I recall that Rich Shankland decided not to use the bargain prop he

had
bought for his Emeraude.

Now here's an aluminum McCauley which was originally 76" and is now

75.188.
In other words 13/32" have been removed from each blade, reducing its
diameter by 13/16".

It seems ac 43.13A, McCauley, or the tcds ought to say something about

this
and the limits a prop may be shortened but I haven't found it yet.

Anybody
know if this prop would be legal on a certified aircraft with a

Continental
O-300? Or can direct us to the pertinent specs?
Thanks.




  #3  
Old September 9th 03, 03:53 PM
Cy Galley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

If it was on a Cessna 170, then ...
Propeller
(a)
McCauley 1A170
33 lb.
(-39)
(-39)
(-39)
Static r.p.m. at max. permissible throttle setting:
Landplane: Not over 2330, not under 2230
Seaplane (Models 170A and 170B): Not over 2525, not under 2300.
No additional tolerance permitted.
Diameter: Not over 76 in., not under 74.5 in.
Propeller spinner, dwg. No. 0550101-3
-eligible-
Propeller spinner, dwg. No. 0550162
2 lb.
(-39)
(-39)
(-39)
So you current length should be O.K. The problem of prop shortening I believe was when they chopped several inches below the minimum approved length.

"Larry Smith" wrote in message ...
A year or so ago there was a thread about shortened aluminum prop blades,
especially on Sensenich props, going into flutter and departing O-320's.
And I recall that Rich Shankland decided not to use the bargain prop he had
bought for his Emeraude.

Now here's an aluminum McCauley which was originally 76" and is now 75.188.
In other words 13/32" have been removed from each blade, reducing its
diameter by 13/16".

It seems ac 43.13A, McCauley, or the tcds ought to say something about this
and the limits a prop may be shortened but I haven't found it yet. Anybody
know if this prop would be legal on a certified aircraft with a Continental
O-300? Or can direct us to the pertinent specs?
Thanks.


  #4  
Old September 9th 03, 04:12 PM
Rich S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Larry Smith" wrote in message
...
A year or so ago there was a thread about shortened aluminum prop blades,
especially on Sensenich props, going into flutter and departing O-320's.
And I recall that Rich Shankland decided not to use the bargain prop he

had
bought for his Emeraude.


That's correct, so I sold it for a wall hangar, with the warning that it
should not be used. Then later as I was talking to a fellow who, along with
several friends, were facing the purchase of new props to replace those on
their RV's which had been similarly shortened. He told me that they had
solved the problem by having their props harmonically tested, finding the
critical frequency, and placarding them for operation in that rpm range
(with adequate safety margins above and below the critical center).

I'm just as happy without it, though; as I like to be able to select "slow
cruise" rpm settings which would fall right at the common critical rpm
range. Another factor in my decision was that Northwest propellers declined
to inspect or magnaflux it, stating that they do not touch props which have
been modified beyond factory limits, due to the liability involved. This
prop was shortened something like 3" on each end - well beyond the factory
limits for that model.
]
Besides which, I paid $75 for it at a garage sale and got $375 for it on
eBay - as a wall hangar!

Rich S.


  #5  
Old September 9th 03, 05:18 PM
Larry Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Rich S." wrote in message
...
[...] Besides which, I paid $75 for it at a garage sale and got $375 for
it on
eBay - as a wall hangar!

Rich S.

Good for you. Shrewd fella.


  #6  
Old September 9th 03, 05:21 PM
Larry Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks, Cy, for your usual splendid courtesy. I found the tcds for the AIQ and it permits a prop of diameter no less than 75.5" so I don't think this prop is legal for it.
"Cy Galley" wrote in message news:[email protected]
If it was on a Cessna 170, then ...
Propeller
(a)
McCauley 1A170
33 lb.
(-39)
(-39)
(-39)
Static r.p.m. at max. permissible throttle setting:
Landplane: Not over 2330, not under 2230
Seaplane (Models 170A and 170B): Not over 2525, not under 2300.
No additional tolerance permitted.
Diameter: Not over 76 in., not under 74.5 in.
Propeller spinner, dwg. No. 0550101-3
-eligible-
Propeller spinner, dwg. No. 0550162
2 lb.
(-39)
(-39)
(-39)
So you current length should be O.K. The problem of prop shortening I believe was when they chopped several inches below the minimum approved length.

"Larry Smith" wrote in message ...
A year or so ago there was a thread about shortened aluminum prop blades,
especially on Sensenich props, going into flutter and departing O-320's.
And I recall that Rich Shankland decided not to use the bargain prop he had
bought for his Emeraude.

Now here's an aluminum McCauley which was originally 76" and is now 75.188.
In other words 13/32" have been removed from each blade, reducing its
diameter by 13/16".

It seems ac 43.13A, McCauley, or the tcds ought to say something about this
and the limits a prop may be shortened but I haven't found it yet. Anybody
know if this prop would be legal on a certified aircraft with a Continental
O-300? Or can direct us to the pertinent specs?
Thanks.


  #7  
Old September 9th 03, 05:46 PM
Cy Galley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Propeller and propeller
limits from the 172 TCDS
1.
Propeller
(a)
McCauley 1A170
Static rpm at maximum permissible throttle setting:
Not over 2360, not under 2230
No additional tolerance permitted
Diameter: not over 76 in., not under 74.5 in.
"Larry Smith" wrote in message ...
Thanks, Cy, for your usual splendid courtesy. I found the tcds for the AIQ and it permits a prop of diameter no less than 75.5" so I don't think this prop is legal for it.
"Cy Galley" wrote in message news:[email protected]
If it was on a Cessna 170, then ...
Propeller
(a)
McCauley 1A170
33 lb.
(-39)
(-39)
(-39)
Static r.p.m. at max. permissible throttle setting:
Landplane: Not over 2330, not under 2230
Seaplane (Models 170A and 170B): Not over 2525, not under 2300.
No additional tolerance permitted.
Diameter: Not over 76 in., not under 74.5 in.
Propeller spinner, dwg. No. 0550101-3
-eligible-
Propeller spinner, dwg. No. 0550162
2 lb.
(-39)
(-39)
(-39)
So you current length should be O.K. The problem of prop shortening I believe was when they chopped several inches below the minimum approved length.

"Larry Smith" wrote in message ...
A year or so ago there was a thread about shortened aluminum prop blades,
especially on Sensenich props, going into flutter and departing O-320's.
And I recall that Rich Shankland decided not to use the bargain prop he had
bought for his Emeraude.

Now here's an aluminum McCauley which was originally 76" and is now 75.188.
In other words 13/32" have been removed from each blade, reducing its
diameter by 13/16".

It seems ac 43.13A, McCauley, or the tcds ought to say something about this
and the limits a prop may be shortened but I haven't found it yet. Anybody
know if this prop would be legal on a certified aircraft with a Continental
O-300? Or can direct us to the pertinent specs?
Thanks.


  #8  
Old September 9th 03, 06:15 PM
Ron Natalie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Bela P. Havasreti" wrote in message ...
On Tue, 9 Sep 2003 09:49:51 -0400, "Larry Smith"
wrote:

What model McCauley prop?

My B model Cessna 170 Type Certificate sheet says the permissible
lengths for a 1A170DM McCauley prop is 76" max and 74.5" min.

I see the 1A170 74-76" on O-300's on Aeronca 15AC,
74.5-76 on the Cessna 172
73-74 on the Maule M4

1A175 78.4-80 on the 172 Seaplane.

1C172 74.5-76 on the Maule M4
74-76 on the Super Rallye

That's the only combinations of MacCauley fixed props and O-300's I can find
in the type certificate database.


  #9  
Old September 9th 03, 09:30 PM
Robert Bonomi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Rich S. wrote:
"Larry Smith" wrote in message
...
A year or so ago there was a thread about shortened aluminum prop blades,
especially on Sensenich props, going into flutter and departing O-320's.
And I recall that Rich Shankland decided not to use the bargain prop he

had
bought for his Emeraude.


That's correct, so I sold it for a wall hangar, with the warning that it
should not be used. Then later as I was talking to a fellow who, along with
several friends, were facing the purchase of new props to replace those on
their RV's which had been similarly shortened. He told me that they had
solved the problem by having their props harmonically tested, finding the
critical frequency, and placarding them for operation in that rpm range
(with adequate safety margins above and below the critical center).

I'm just as happy without it, though; as I like to be able to select "slow
cruise" rpm settings which would fall right at the common critical rpm
range. Another factor in my decision was that Northwest propellers declined
to inspect or magnaflux it, stating that they do not touch props which have
been modified beyond factory limits, due to the liability involved. This
prop was shortened something like 3" on each end - well beyond the factory
limits for that model.
]
Besides which, I paid $75 for it at a garage sale and got $375 for it on
eBay - as a wall hangar!


An a-prop-riate ending for it!
  #10  
Old September 9th 03, 09:48 PM
Rich S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Robert Bonomi" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Rich S. wrote:
That's correct, so I sold it for a wall *hangar*, (snip)
Besides which, I paid $75 for it at a garage sale and got $375 for it on
eBay - as a wall *hangar*!


An a-prop-riate ending for it!


Gadzooks! I just spotted my spelling error. Have at me, BOb.

Rich "Habit forming" S.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
MT MTV-9-B-C/C190 Propeller for Sale - Pitts N5351N.jpg (0/1) Chris Nehls Aerobatics 2 December 19th 04 06:38 AM
propeller calculation and how to build jgarner Home Built 7 August 25th 03 03:23 AM
Propeller Jan Carlsson Home Built 11 July 12th 03 10:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.