Do you mean like an Enstrom? I have a few hours in them from the 80s and 90s and they have a 6-7 inch belt and clutch mechanism off the engine BUT, properly cared for, the belt, clutch, and the engine will last 1600 hours and make TBO.

What is unnerving is seeing the overtemp indicators on the belt, knowing that the pilot before you either didn’t look at it or did something horrible to the engine and belt and failed to report it in post flight. They had one shred and the pilot had to autorotate and ended up crashing gently. The school went through two Enstroms in 3 years. They had to replace that otherwise good belt a few times one year. Instruction wasn’t gentle on that bird but they were great helicopters to fly.

However, looking at the belt and not a clutch plate like I had in the car was unnerving the first few times.

Yes. Its called a Rotorway Heli and the belt drives the TR.

That right there is funny, I don't care who you are.

Even more fun: if only we could get Chris and Mike C on opposite sides of a technical argument.

Chris C,

I'd love to see this thing succeed. I seriously doubt that will happen, but hey.

What performance numbers would be the minimum for you to consider it a success?

I don't have anything meaningful to say, I just wanted to add the word "polar" a few times. Polar polar polar.

I reckon it makes me sound pretty smart.

Don’t forget to wave!

I was cutting the grass today and realized that the pattern I was using was inefficient. By using a polar chart I was able to determine the correct pattern. It cut the total mowing time 6.7%. And by using a polar chart I was able to adjust the throttle on the mower to a more economical setting improving the fuel economy by 9.5%.

According to a polar chart, those two changes improved my mowing efficency by 87.3%.

I'm a believer now.

Mow Raptor, mow!

Mocking the euphemisms of educational jargon? Yes? What purpose would that serve? Heretical monstration of pithy sophomoric toddler effluvia, possibly?

Polar polar polar!

TOOTH BELT DRIVES
http://www.epi-eng.com/propeller_reduct ... erview.htm

bad setups can also crack/snap crankshafts

I find this incredibly hard to believe! While I could understand a maritime engineer not understanding when to use TAS vs IAS, there is no way an even remotely competent maritime engineer would not have a better understanding of how a prop works! While a layman might consider air and water to be very different, to aerospace engineers and maritime engineers (naval architects) they are they same, a fluid (air becomes a compressible fluid as you approach the speed of sound, but it is still a fluid). We all took the same fluid dynamics classes so I know what you SHOULD know.

Anyone with the background you claim would have answered Ted's question about prop exit flow velocity over the fueselage in a tractor aircraft in terms of Mdot and Delta V and would have known intuitively that as a vessel's velocity increases, the change in velocity of the fluid flowing through the prop decreases. They also would have known intuitively that for an aircraft flying at 300 knots the delta V and therefore the change in drag verses a pusher design would not be as significant as you proposed.

You are capapble of posting terms phrases and facts, but you clearly have no understanding of the concepts behind them. I would be shocked if you had a real engineering degree that involves any study of fluid dynamics and propellers. If you do, hire a lawyer and sue the school for a full refund of your tuition! Seriously!

you don't say ? I have a couple of nephews on nuclear boats. Which boat was yours? That's a small world.

Another small world is large slow-speed engines. My employer has a division that makes such animals, in Kiel. I did a few years in performance analysis there. What heavy oil engines were you working on, and what technical knowledge did you glean therein which that makes you qualified to comment on tiny car engines converted for use in airplanes ?

Do tell.

Of, if you are really a 14 year old kid posting from mom's basement, carry on as you are.

oh, before I forget the word of the day. Polar.
Personally I hated the pole. Not someplace I'll be going again although it was a pleasure seeing the engines from my cold test chamber work out in the real world.

Dang it, you guys... I'm out for a walk, trying to get some exercise and fresh air. People are going to wonder why I'm looking at my phone and laughing.

To get briefly back to the matter of the first flight of the Raptor, one thing that concerns me is the general state of health of Peter, the developer. Having watched a number of his videos over the past few years, one thing I have noticed is that he looks sort of burned out these days. That isn't surprising concerning how hard he is working. He is an intelligent fellow with a heck of a lot of perseverance, but at this stage I think he needs to step back a bit and get some rest, especially if it ends up that he has to do the first couple of test flights.

you don't say ? I have a couple of nephews on nuclear boats. Which boat was yours? That's a small world.

Another small world is large slow-speed engines. My employer has a division that makes such animals, in Kiel. I did a few years in performance analysis there. What heavy oil engines were you working on, and what technical knowledge did you glean therein which that makes you qualified to comment on tiny car engines converted for use in airplanes ?

Do tell.

Of, if you are really a 14 year old kid posting from mom's basement, carry on as you are.

oh, before I forget the word of the day. Polar.
Personally I hated the pole. Not someplace I'll be going again although it was a pleasure seeing the engines from my cold test chamber work out in the real world.