REFLECTOR: Props and runway surfaces (was XLRG on grass)

[Scott Derrick]

I'm confused as to why MT's props look so bad so soon, when those of us 
flying Catto props don't feel the same way?  My Catto after 100-150 hours 
certainly doesn't look new any more!  Actually I repainted it about 100 
hours ago after wacking it really hard with a alternator mounting bolt, 
washers and nut.

Is this because they are so pricey that a bit of roughage effects you more, 
like that first dent in a new car?
Is this because they are closer to the ground?
Is this because the blades are made from a softer material and they 
actually abrade faster?
Is this because they are more efficient, being a CS prop and thus suck up 
more debris than a fixed pitch.  Which could mean Catto blade on a MT hub 
would degrade just a fast?

Scott


At 07:54 AM 7/7/2004, you wrote:
>Dave,
>If you would like, when you figure out what data you are going to collect 
>some of us with the same engine /prop on the XLRG could also repeat the 
>data so you have more than one set of data on different airframes.
>
>I have about 250 hours on my MT and it looks bad between the initial 
>flights at Sebastian and my airport is not much better it wont be long 
>before i will need a repair/refurbishment.
>
>Jack
>N55XL
>_______________________________________________
>To change your email address, visit 
>http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>
>Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
>user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
>Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
>Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>


"Those who sacrifice freedom to get security, deserve neither."
- Benjamin Franklin