Maybe this table will be easier to read.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth B. Jones" <[email protected]>
To: "KRnet" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 7:32 AM
Subject: Re: KR> glide rato..
> Perhaps the stopped prop is less drag because it's stalled.
>
> Below is data taken from my flight test. My idle setting was about 800 to
> 900 rpm, a little high, at the time. Speeds are indicated knots. My
> plane stalls at about 50 knots indicated so I didn't check the glide below
> 60 kts. Surely the ratio will start back the other way before it stalls.
> I have a KR-2 with Diehl wings, 3 blade Warp drive taper blade 58" prop
> set at 19.5 degrees at the tip, A65, empty weight is 623 lbs., full fuel
> is 14 gal and I weigh about 180.
>
> Glide
> Speed Descent Distance Glide
> kts ft/min NM/1000 ft. Ratio
>
60 400 2.50 15.18
> 65 442.5 2.45 12.93
> 70 525 2.22 11.73
> 75 625 2.00 10.56
> 80 750 1.78 9.39
> 85 800 1.77 9.35
> 90 900 1.67 8.80
> 95 1100 1.44 7.60
> 100 1500 1.11 5.87
>
>
> BTW, Bill's 2.5 miles per 1000 ft altitude is a glide ratio of 13.2 : 1
> (if I calculated correctly).
>
> Ken Jones, [email protected]
> Sharonville, OH
> N5834, aka The Porkopolis Flying Pig
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Barry Kruyssen" <[email protected]>
> To: "KRnet" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 6:31 PM
> Subject: Re: KR> what a day./ glide rato..
>
>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: larry flesner I doubt if a stopped
>> propeller is going to triple that number
>>
>> A stopped prop actually produces less drag, don't know the reason but
>> have tried it in self launch gliders (without feathering the prop) both
>> idling engine and stoped, there is noticeably less drag when the prop was
>> stopped. Also it is better for the prop to stop vertically so any
>> vortices from the prop don't upset the air flow over the wing, so I'm
>> told but I couldn't tell the difference :-)
>>
>> regards
>> Barry Kruyssen
>
