Sometimes you have to give up so e things in order to make the transportation more compact. I would suspect that is why they decided to go with a 2 blade as it would fit in a tighter package when it is disassembled.
On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 11:56 PM Bill Prince <[email protected]> wrote: > They could get a few more miles and better lift if they went to a > 3-blade prop. Same diameter. > > > bp > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> > > On 11/5/2017 3:53 PM, Rory Conaway wrote: > > I'm sure they were looking at the efficiency. Slow blades, lower fuel > consumption rate. > > > > Rory > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bill Prince > > Sent: Sunday, November 5, 2017 1:30 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Drone > > > > That is one bodacious propeller relative to the wing length. I think > that would prevent any kind of flying in ground effect. > > > > > > bp > > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> > > > > On 11/5/2017 12:25 PM, Chuck McCown wrote: > >> My nephew stopped by on his way to the Dugway Proving Grounds today. > >> He popped the container on the device he is taking out to demo for the > >> Navy. > >> The company he works for manufactures these things in Bingen Washington. > >> > >> It takes off and lands as a helicopter.� On the wing tips are some > >> tiny one bladed rotators that are counter torque during take off and > >> landing operations.� Flies something like 36 hours on 2 gallons of > fuel. > >> > >> One of my sons and my granddaughter in photo. > >
