coty061885 Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 http://web.camaross.com/forums/showthread.php?t=447443 :eek2: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceGhost Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Sweet! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Apex Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 :leghump: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLN SUX Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 i need a towel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 can the motor spin the prop fast enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinner Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 can the motor spin the prop fast enough? I was thinking the same thing. I always thought airplane engines needed to be high hp and low/lower torque. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Science Abuse Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 Horible choice of engine for a beutiful plane. Seriously, not a good aircraft engine. Looks like a modified Turbine Legend, or a variant of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLN SUX Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 Prop speed isnt always important... its the speed @ pitch. You can run a shallow pitch prop and run a 10,000 rpm and make the same thrust as a a deep pitched prop at half the rpm. Like a boat, the as long as the engine is turning the prop, its under load and using torque to counter-act the forces of wind resistance. Many of the old WW2 planes used Jaguar V10 and V12 engines... they dont have to turn tons of RPM, just have enough power to spin a deep pitched prop. I would think a boosted LS1 would work quiet well. Being under constant load, it would always be in boost and make all the power and torque you could ever need for a tiny ass little plane like that. I wouldnt be surprised if they made it for racing purposes only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lustalbert Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 Horible choice of engine for a beutiful plane. Seriously, not a good aircraft engine. Looks like a modified Turbine Legend, or a variant of it. Based on? Appears to be a variable pitch prop, and an engine with a good broad torque curve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rally Pat Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 Porsche did the same thing to show the reliability and durability of the 944 engine back when it came out, and that was a 4 cyl. Im sure this has a bit more power than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lustalbert Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 I would love to see the originating site for that project. Be interesting to read the buildup, and what it cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stealthmonkey Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 Next week on: When Infinite Amounts of Money Goes Wrong.... BUAHAHAHA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lustalbert Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 can the motor spin the prop fast enough? A Piper Arrow with a 200 HP lycoming redlines at ~ 3K, normal crusing is at 2.5K If anything, a LSx is going to spin the wee out of a prop without a gear reduction box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Science Abuse Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 they dont have to turn tons of RPM, just have enough power to spin a deep pitched prop. And a gear box. Your speed will always be dependant on prop speed, no matter what the pitch. Keep in mind, your prop disturbs the air as it passes through it, a steep pitch prop isn't efficient at all at high speed. You need horsepower more then torque. I'm not saying the LS1 wont get the plane off the ground, P51s and Spitfires used similar layouts. But this isn't 1945, it's 2006, we've got better stuff. The gas turbine ("turbo prop") has far surpassed the piston engine in this feild. Lighter, more HP per pound (and more torque actualy)....and more expensive. But a 300hp Turbine Legend of that size will tag 250mph with great efficiency. And you cant beat it's reat of climb. I'd like to see the results of this thing. On this is for sure: It damn sure wont handle well That wing needs to com forward at least 2ft to hit the planes center of gravity. All the weight in that thing will be ahead of the prop, unless you put 200lbs in the tail, in which it'll be a pig. Looks like a speed plane and nothing more. Dig this: http://www.legendaryaircraft.com/firewallforward Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Science Abuse Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 Addendum: found it..... http://members.iquest.net/~aca/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lustalbert Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 55K for a DIY kit. In a few years I will be accepting roll races..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaSSon Posted April 28, 2006 Report Share Posted April 28, 2006 Death. Trap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berto Posted April 29, 2006 Report Share Posted April 29, 2006 from what i understand the only necessity for turbos on plane motors is at highaltitudes when the air gets thiner the turbo allows the engine to continue breathing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPLN SUX Posted April 29, 2006 Report Share Posted April 29, 2006 from what i understand the only necessity for turbos on plane motors is at highaltitudes when the air gets thiner the turbo allows the engine to continue breathing. this is true, but even boosted engines lose power at altitude... ask the guys that run up pikes peak FYI - I did once, and they lose somewhere in the neighborhood of 40% of thier horsepower from bottom to top... i think they mentioned it on an episode of Monster Garage too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suffocateXfaster1647545505 Posted April 29, 2006 Report Share Posted April 29, 2006 Wonder how much that cost to set up.. sheesh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.