Hi guys
I guess the only thing that needs to be remembered is the
prop tip must never become supersonic so work out the prop dia and what
rpm keeps it near supersonic and that will be close to the prop rpm.
Cheers
Innis
From: Arnt Karlsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: FlightGear developers
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
..what had me wondering is the eng-rpm in the turbine-engine section,
where these word of wisdom appears: ;o)
And what would you propose? Turbine RPM is almost never quoted in
real units, but in percentages. Where is appropriate, the
documentation tells you to specify
Jim Wilson wrote:
From: Josh Babcock
snip
Yeah, I'm still messing around and I don't really understand what I'm doing.
The .35 gear ratio came straight out of the POH, and I think I recall seeing a
cutaway photo of this engine with a gearbox behind the propeller. The engine
rpms should be
Yeah, I have been reviewing this, and I think I understand how the definition
works. I'm getting pretty much the same numbers based on the 2900 and .35
which
I got out of the POH and several internet sources on the cyclone engines. I
have
a more appropriate yasim file now, but I still
Jim Wilson wrote:
Yeah, I have been reviewing this, and I think I understand how the definition
works. I'm getting pretty much the same numbers based on the 2900 and .35 which
I got out of the POH and several internet sources on the cyclone engines. I have
a more appropriate yasim file now, but
Jim Wilson wrote:
Yeah, I have been reviewing this, and I think I understand how the definition
works. I'm getting pretty much the same numbers based on the 2900 and .35 which
I got out of the POH and several internet sources on the cyclone engines. I have
a more appropriate yasim file now, but
Josh Babcock wrote:
Jim Wilson wrote:
Yeah, I have been reviewing this, and I think I understand how the
definition works. I'm getting pretty much the same numbers based on
the 2900 and .35 which I got out of the POH and several internet
sources on the cyclone engines. I have a more appropriate
Josh Babcock wrote:
Josh Babcock wrote:
Jim Wilson wrote:
Yeah, I have been reviewing this, and I think I understand how the
definition works. I'm getting pretty much the same numbers based on
the 2900 and .35 which I got out of the POH and several internet
sources on the cyclone engines. I
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 07:45:07 -0800, Andy wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
..what had me wondering is the eng-rpm in the turbine-engine
section, where these word of wisdom appears: ;o)
And what would you propose? Turbine RPM is almost never quoted in
real units,
