BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 18:48

Username Protected wrote:

What makes the extra engine worth the expense is the redundancy. Two electrical systems. Two vacuum systems (if used anymore). And of course the extra fan that is going to get you to the airport on a crappy IFR day if you lose one.

My plane has 3 or 4 electrical systems. 3 Batteries. ZERO vacuum systems (what's a vacuum system)? And I'm half as likely to lose 1

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 18:50

Tickets! Tickets please! :popcorn:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 18:55

Username Protected wrote:

Two engines will outperform a single when you reach the maximum effective power you can place in a prop. Look at the Reno racers. The question would be if the PC12 has reached its effective maximum HP that can be run through the prop (you would then need to add blades, twist or more length) till you reach a saturation point.

Please minus this detail out of your explanation. Assume the engines are fitted with the appropriate props for their power as is a PC12 and a KA.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 19:04

Username Protected wrote:

The torque applied to a prop from a 1700 HP motor produces a lot more thrust than that produced by and 850hp motor. Having 2 850HP motors going to 2 separate props is still producing the same amount of torque to each prop. If you could hook 2 850 hp motors to 1 prop then yes, you would be producing much more torque to that prop and therefore producing more thrust.

why?

Are you just regurgitating something technical someone told you and that you were inclined to believe because your liked the sound of it?

I prefer to not be spoon fed my technical information. Of course, I am a technical professional and have several degrees in science and engineering. Doesn't mean I'm right...hell, I'm usually wrong. But you better bring more than this garbage if you want to make a point.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 19:13

Username Protected wrote:

What makes the extra engine worth the expense is the redundancy. Two electrical systems. Two vacuum systems (if used anymore). And of course the extra fan that is going to get you to the airport on a crappy IFR day if you lose one.

My plane has 3 or 4 electrical systems. 3 Batteries. ZERO vacuum systems (what's a vacuum system)? And I'm half as likely to lose 1

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 19:19

Only on BT can you start with a thread talking about how big the cabin of a Pilatus is and end up arguing how to run the engine in it. Next, we will have a Duke hater step in an tell you that the Aerostar or 421 is such a better plane than the Pilatus.

Jason runs his engine the way he wants to. If it is wrong he will find out on an inspection. Till then it does not matter since 98% of us don't own a turbine and only know what we read which is probably about 25% correct.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 19:24

Username Protected wrote:

Jason runs his engine the way he wants to. If it is wrong he will find out on an inspection. Till then it does not matter since 98% of us don't own a turbine and only know what we read which is probably about 25% correct.

I agree. It's his plane. He writes the checks.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 19:36

Username Protected wrote:

why?

Are you just regurgitating something technical someone told you and that you were inclined to believe because your liked the sound of it?

I prefer to not be spoon fed my technical information. Of course, I am a technical professional and have several degrees in science and engineering. Doesn't mean I'm right...hell, I'm usually wrong. But you better bring more than this garbage if you want to make a point.

You're a horrible debater. You realize all you're doing here is making snippy remarks and talking %#$@? Be part of the conversation or move on.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 19:38

Username Protected wrote:

You have one starter generator correct?

Edit: I just looked it up and it appears you have two generators. Nice.

Still with my 7000 hours in turboprops I have had 1 failure (Py leak) and two shutdowns due to no oil pressure. If I had been flying a single I had a good chance of being on the evening news.

I have 2 generators. 7000 hours and you don't know any of this stuff?

I have plenty of buddies with 15K plus hours and have never shut one down. Since you're still thinking about vacuum systems and such I think your shutdowns were probably during WW2 or something. Answer the phone, 2004 is calling.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 19:41

Username Protected wrote:

why?

Are you just regurgitating something technical someone told you and that you were inclined to believe because your liked the sound of it?

I prefer to not be spoon fed my technical information. Of course, I am a technical professional and have several degrees in science and engineering. Doesn't mean I'm right...hell, I'm usually wrong. But you better bring more than this garbage if you want to make a point.

You're a horrible debater. You realize all you're doing here is making snippy remarks and talking %#$@? Be part of the conversation or move on.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 19:43

Username Protected wrote:

You truly are jay carney. You don't know what you're talking about. You can't make your point. When you're exposed you act like a child. Pathetic.

At least I'm talking about something and making a point. You're just calling people names. That's what people usually do when they've lost the debate and don't have a leg to stand on.

I don't know who Jay Carney is or what you're talking about. Children call people names.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 19:45

Username Protected wrote:

You truly are jay carney. You don't know what you're talking about. You can't make your point. When you're exposed you act like a child. Pathetic.

At least I'm talking about something and making a point. You're just calling people names. That's what people usually do when they've lost the debate and don'e have a leg to stand on.

I don't know who Jay Carney is or what you're talking about.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 19:46

Username Protected wrote:

Seriously. You haven't made a compelling argument yet.

Show 1 post that's proven me wrong. You certainly haven't. Break out some math and prove me wrong.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 19:47

Jason....I don't think you're Jay Carney.....heck you look nothing like him. :peace:

anyways....you'd not want to be Jay Carney. :hammer:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 28 Jun 2014, 19:50

Username Protected wrote:

You have one starter generator correct?

Edit: I just looked it up and it appears you have two generators. Nice.

Still with my 7000 hours in turboprops I have had 1 failure (Py leak) and two shutdowns due to no oil pressure. If I had been flying a single I had a good chance of being on the evening news.

I have 2 generators. 7000 hours and you don't know any of this stuff?

I have plenty of buddies with 15K plus hours and have never shut one down. Since you're still thinking about vacuum systems and such I think your shutdowns were probably during WW2 or something. Answer the phone, 2004 is calling.

That PC12 is biiiiiiiig.