Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RayChuang88
8, 10, 12 or 24 blades, a 450 mph prop plane is still going to be LOUD compared to a Turbofan.

If you spin the prop slower, the plane is going to go slower, which is unacceptable.

As Jesse says, Keep hope alive.

Me, being a realist, know that the UDF is dead. To prove my point, here is the the GE UDF test bed aircraft crashed for a movie prop. No Air and Space Museum for it. After the first flight, everyone pretty much knew it had no future.

I personally think it sounds cool (and if there were only a couple of them, I wouldn't mind), but it aint 1944 anymore.

33 posted on 06/06/2006 9:23:07 PM PDT by UNGN (I've been here since '98 but had nothing to say until now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]


To: UNGN
If you spin the prop slower, the plane is going to go slower, which is unacceptable.

One of the reasons why the ATR-42/72 turboprop airliners switched from four-blade propeller units to six-blade propeller units was the very fact this allows for slower fan blade speeds for the same thrust output, which 1) reduces noise quite a bit and 2) reduces fuel burn due to slower speed of the engine during flight. Why do you think Lockheed did the same thing with the C-130J, the current model of the famous Hercules cargo transport?

Hence the reason why the switch from eight-blade to ten-blade propfans. With more blades, this allows for slower blade spin speeds with all the benefits I mentioned above.

35 posted on 06/06/2006 9:45:29 PM PDT by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson