| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On 01 Sep 2004 11:41:09 GMT,
JAXAshby wrote: jimmy, look at the blades. if you can't see what they look like and what they do, look at a prop that feathers and you **should** see the difference. if still not, ask a dockboy to explain it to you. I had hoped you would have a point, and debate it, rather than simply sliding into insults. I guess I was hoping for too much. From: Jim Richardson Date: 9/1/2004 5:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time Message-id: On 01 Sep 2004 02:03:35 GMT, JAXAshby wrote: the blades are curved, and rather dramatically so. So what? feathering a prop doesn't require that there be *no* drag, it's a way to reduce drag, not eliminate it. The autoprop blades rotate to parallel to the axis of the shaft, how is that not feathering? The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is this not feathering? take a look at the blades. they rotate and thus *reduce* drag, but they certainly don't "feather". I have, the blades rotate to line up with the axis of the shaft, how is that *not* feathering? -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed... Oh wait, he does -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock Never be in the company of anyone with whom you would not want to die. -- Fremen Saying -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock Contrary to popular belief, Unix is user friendly. It just happens to be very selective about who its friends are. -- Kyle Hearn |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
jim, if you choose to redefine every English word to suit your fancy, there is
no debate possible. green is carrots, rum is gravel, curved prop blades are straight. makes no room for discussion. you bought one and are trying to convince yourself it was a wise "investment". Just like gold will reach $2,000 an ounce six weeks after the election. you are a true-believer, jim, and you pushed the English language around to form it to your convictions. who could debate that? From: Jim Richardson Date: 9/2/2004 4:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time Message-id: On 01 Sep 2004 11:41:09 GMT, JAXAshby wrote: jimmy, look at the blades. if you can't see what they look like and what they do, look at a prop that feathers and you **should** see the difference. if still not, ask a dockboy to explain it to you. I had hoped you would have a point, and debate it, rather than simply sliding into insults. I guess I was hoping for too much. From: Jim Richardson Date: 9/1/2004 5:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time Message-id: On 01 Sep 2004 02:03:35 GMT, JAXAshby wrote: the blades are curved, and rather dramatically so. So what? feathering a prop doesn't require that there be *no* drag, it's a way to reduce drag, not eliminate it. The autoprop blades rotate to parallel to the axis of the shaft, how is that not feathering? The blades rotate until they are inline with the shaft axis, how is this not feathering? take a look at the blades. they rotate and thus *reduce* drag, but they certainly don't "feather". I have, the blades rotate to line up with the axis of the shaft, how is that *not* feathering? -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed... Oh wait, he does -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock Never be in the company of anyone with whom you would not want to die. -- Fremen Saying -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock Contrary to popular belief, Unix is user friendly. It just happens to be very selective about who its friends are. -- Kyle Hearn |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 02 Sep 2004 12:14:22 GMT,
JAXAshby wrote: jim, if you choose to redefine every English word to suit your fancy, there is no debate possible. green is carrots, rum is gravel, curved prop blades are straight. makes no room for discussion. The definition you yourself provided for feathering, fits the autoprop. The blades rotate to inline with the fluid flow. How is that not feathering? you bought one and are trying to convince yourself it was a wise "investment". Just like gold will reach $2,000 an ounce six weeks after the election. you are a true-believer, jim, and you pushed the English language around to form it to your convictions. who could debate that? Well, given that your assumption that I bought one, is in error, the rest of your "logic" proceding from that error, is equally flawed. -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock Linux: There is no conspiracy... yet -- Matthew Adair |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
no, the chord does. which word don't you understand?
From: Jim Richardson Date: 9/2/2004 1:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time Message-id: On 02 Sep 2004 12:14:22 GMT, JAXAshby wrote: jim, if you choose to redefine every English word to suit your fancy, there is no debate possible. green is carrots, rum is gravel, curved prop blades are straight. makes no room for discussion. The definition you yourself provided for feathering, fits the autoprop. The blades rotate to inline with the fluid flow. How is that not feathering? you bought one and are trying to convince yourself it was a wise "investment". Just like gold will reach $2,000 an ounce six weeks after the election. you are a true-believer, jim, and you pushed the English language around to form it to your convictions. who could debate that? Well, given that your assumption that I bought one, is in error, the rest of your "logic" proceding from that error, is equally flawed. -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock Linux: There is no conspiracy... yet -- Matthew Adair |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 03 Sep 2004 04:01:46 GMT,
JAXAshby wrote: no, the chord does. which word don't you understand? The "chord does" What JAXAshby ? -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock "Human beings can always be counted on to assert with vigor their God-given right to be stupid." -- Dean Koontz |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
jim, redefine any and all words you can to "prove" (to yourself and any
doubters out there) that your spending $2,200 for a prop to make your boat go 1/10th knot faster was one hell of a smart "investment". the word "feathering" can not be used in the context of a corkscrew prop such as an auto-prop. except by "investers" mentioned above. an auto-prop is an auto-prop. the blades twist a little under high power/low speed, twist a little differently under low power/low speed, and twist something differently under no power/any speed. the drag on the prop is still very high indeed (as a percentage) compared to a genuine feathering prop. auto-props are sold (by the manufacturer at least, if not always by the dealer) as a variable speed transmission. keep in mind that props don't drag all that much anyway. according to the MIT data, even a fixed 3 blade only pulled 170# on a boat at 5 knots, or about the equivelent of 2-1/2 hp. From: Jim Richardson Date: 9/3/2004 4:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time Message-id: On 03 Sep 2004 04:01:46 GMT, JAXAshby wrote: no, the chord does. which word don't you understand? The "chord does" What JAXAshby ? -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock "Human beings can always be counted on to assert with vigor their God-given right to be stupid." -- Dean Koontz |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Subject: What are the pros and cons of a folding prop?
From: Jim Richardson I had hoped you would have a point, and debate it, rather than simply sliding into insults. I guess I was hoping for too much. He had neither a point to make nor the ability or interest to debate it. As per usual, Doodles was just trying to "stir the pot". He probably has less experience with feathering props than I do, and I have none .... only used to "zero pitch" type props. Shen |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Rigid vang...pros & cons? | General | |||
Hybrid Mode
