Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Madhatter

  1. There are exhaust ball joints built into each pipe, you can see two in this photo. They are swaged in place and only adjust with heat and load.
  2. I have been working on this for over 5 months. Prototype worked well but noise level is too high, changing design a little at this time. Rotax exhaust is 100 +/- 1 DBa at cruise. Trying to at least get that. There are a lot of difficulties in changing the exhaust such as tight cowling and cabine heat. Biggest advantage is more room under engine, better airflow through radiator and pipes less prone to cracking. I may or may not be successful in this. Time will tell.
  3. My CT has no changes with any flap setting or aoa. You would never notice any difference, my ball is centered and no change in speed. With my flaps at 0 degrees my right flap is about 1/4 to3/8 inch below the fuselage fairing trailing edge. My roll issue is significant so it doesn't take much.
  4. I think you will find that the springs are only for giving some resistance to the controls and may be contributing to preventing an aileron flutter situation. My reason for making roll adjustment with flaps is to keep the ailerons reasonably even. I have tried aileron changes on other planes over the years and have found myself going in circles with aileron and stick or wheel positions, flaps are easy and are not noticable. The only issue with the CT is access to the flap adjustment as you have have to be 3 feet tall and can stand up in the baggage compartment. (Ibuprofen helps). My CT roll issue was very significant and took a significant aileron response. If yours is minor you probably can correct it much more easily and adjusting spring tension would be like having aileron trim, sound good.
  5. I have a good friend who owns a large repair station in Charleston. He bought a swift with a 145 hp engine years ago. I always give him a hard time about "overhauled" engines (by who) and how it was maintained and I got a lot grief for my distrust. I flew with him one day and everything was great. The next time he flew the engine had a catastrophic failure over very dense forest. He saw a narrow logging road and made a successful landing except for a fence gate. Totaled the plane but walked away to the surprised logging crew that was there. Several months later after going through the fuselage he found a pilots logbook and in it he found a reference to a prop strike which was never put in the engine logs. My point is that it is nice to have a ballistic parachute on the CT. My friend was very lucky, it was the only logging road in the area. Roger is right these are old planes and most need a lot of work and Swift has few parts available. It would be great if the plane was totally restored but that would be $$$$$$. Good luck.
  6. My 2006 CTSW when rigged according exactly to the service manual has a tendency to roll significantly to the right in cruise. To compensate for this some might try to readjust the ailerons however it is difficult as they will seek their own neutral position. I find to get any good result seems difficult. I have seen this on many aircraft with no option to change the wing angle of incidence, such as Piper Cherokee's. The easiest way to compensate for the roll with the least amount of drag is to slightly lower one flap to counter the roll, it doesn't take much. These CT's are hand built and even a very small deviation in wing geometry will cause a roll tendency, (I have discussed this with Flight Design years ago). I have done a lot of aircraft this way and it works well when there are no other good options.
  7. After removing my muffler I inspected it for cracks by visual means with no obvious issues. I then checked by pressurizing with a vacuum cleaner (output side). When sprayed with soap water I found 6 cracks occurring at the welds holding the flanges used to support the heat muff cover. The exhaust leaks only occured inside the heat muff area and do not show up externally on the outside of the muffler. This is a serious issue on all aircraft with an exhaust type cabin heaters, there are a lot of air worthiness directives on this on type certified aircraft. There have been a lot of accidents caused by CO and a lot of fatal ones. All mufflers of this type should be checked at each annual or condition inspection and is considered mandatory on all aircraft, just ask the FAA. Most inspect by close visual inspection but I have found it much easier to pressurize and use soap water spray and it will show cracks you can't see. In my opinion the welded heat muff supports are poorly designed, the flanges are welded only on the thin straight edge. When the heat muff cover is attached with the band clamps a lot of concentrated load is put on the flanges and they crack over time, there are only 4 small welds per flange. I had 763 hours on my ctsw. I welded mine but it is difficult to tig correctly because of the exhaust residue contaminating the weld. I had to reweld the flanges in a different location due to the crack repairs.
  8. I bought one from them also, they said it was one of the fastest they ever flew. I had never flown a CTSW before. I owned a small limited avionics shop at the time and by the way the static based instruments reacted on the way home I figured the static was open. When I got home I put the test box on it and there was a case leak on the airspeed, causing a false high IAS. Oh well.
  9. No offense to you but I would think the FAA DAR would settle the issue at least for me. I was offered his position before him which I turned down due to liability, too bad I probably could have certified my own plane. I spent years in Cahokia at Parks, so I know Bellville. Again not an issue with you (you have real experiance) but sometimes frustrating to get good factual conversation elsewhere. I don't have all the answers but would like to find them.
  10. Like I said earlier based on data and ASTM certification the FAA DAR said no tests were required. This guy used to be a FAA FSDO manager for all the maintenance inspectors. I don't understand where all you experts come from. I am done with this and don't have any more time for this.
  11. Just got off the phone with my FAA DAR who did the ELSA certification on my aircraft. He confirmed that there is no issue with me using this propeller and suggested that I record the initial flight data in the logbooks which I had already done.
  12. My new operating limitations do not specify any propeller type, my old SLSA limitations did.
  13. This is not some propeller I found at a yard sale to put on my aircraft. It seems as though a lot of individuals on this forum want debate issues without any data to back them up. With all the talk about this prop it doesn't seem that many have tried to educate themselves but would rather repeat what others say. The Durandal 100 propeller is designed specifically for 912/914 Rotax engines and meets ASTM 2506-13 standard. Has anyone even bothered to know what this is? This meets FAA accepted consensus standards for LSA. This prop is not an "experiment". According to Flight Design there are 85 Flight Design aircraft flying with this prop in other countries. I look at this forum for new info so that I can research it for validity. Unfortunately a lot of professional people in the industry tell me that this forum is not worth looking at with exceptions for a few. I am not ace mechanic or ace engineer, but I try to be. I am looking for facts from people who are experts in their field and spend a lot of time doing so. I have to give Jacques credit for bringing this prop to my attention, this is the kind info I look for.
  14. No flex, everyone needs to read their explanation and data, it's all there. I think I have said all I can say about it, time to go to my next project.
  15. Just to clarify, when I refer to pitch change it is really the efficiency of the prop for all the different flight regimes. They call it ESR effect and it is the aerodynamic design which allows better rpm efficiency under all conditions. When you look at one you will see a significant difference from normal props.
  16. Different propellers respond differently to the engine due to blade airfoil design and pitch. With wot of 5500 on the e prop the climb rpm is about 5300. This shows that the blade pitch is changing to accommodate the increased load as per the design of the propeller. It is acting more like a variable or constant speed propeller. My Neuform prop at wot of 5650 only got 5000 for climb, a more significant load on the engine. The e-prop website data on this has very in depth analysis on this, even enough to satisfy the obsessive engineer ( I am not that type of engineer).
  17. Roger, all my comparative data is same plane same pilot, same oat, etc. Trying to make comparisons using multiple planes and pilots will not give good data. Sometimes new technology works, otherwise we would still be driving to the airport in our model T to get into our Wright Flyer. However my wife said she would like to have a Model T. The only problem is that I would probably want to modify it๐Ÿ˜†
  18. Try one, the difference is significant in performance, no splitting hairs is necessary to see it. I have never seen a prop designed like this, even the sound is very different. 3 people have told me that it sounds more like a conventional aircraft and not a pool toy ๐Ÿ˜‚. The wot target for this prop is 5500. 5400 or 5600 will not perform , I have tried them all. Also all my numbers are indicated airspeed, not true airspeed. You only have to be a pilot good enough to fly straight and level and read a tach to see it, you don't have to be Chuck Yeager on this one, but it might help. If anyone is unhappy with the prop it can be returned within 6 months for full refund. This refund policy is e-mailed on my correspondence by the company CEO. The customer service with this company is with the CEO and is impressive, no delays in e-mail, sometimes in only minutes, once even on a sunday.( their time zone). Time will tell on this prop but so far I am impressed with it.
  19. I am experimental. Smooth air today 60ยฐF, 1500 msl, 5200. 114 kts, IAS, 5400. 117kts IAS, 5500 119kts IAS. WOT of 5400 or 5600 will not make these numbers, 5500 is the best. One thing I noticed if the carb sync is off even a small amount you will get a lot of high frequency vibration around 2500 rpm, something that is not as noticable on a Neuform, I am sure is due to low inertia. I have done about 8 test flights and am satisfied with the prop so far.
  20. 2000hrs no life limit. Go to their website
  21. This is only my preliminary flight data, the next few weeks will establish a better evaluation. Smooth air would be nice.
  22. Total cost delivered including spinner is 1925 USD. Their website is very detailed including extensive test data, engineering data and installation info.
  23. The prop has leading edge protection and is replaceable. The prop and spinner is already fully balanced at the factory and is color coded for indexing.
  24. Installed my e-prop and completed 4 test flights at different wot rpm's on ctsw. The manufacturer of this prop recommends 5500 rpm wot as the overall best rpm for all flight parameters for the 912. The blades have a much smaller chord than any I have ever seen. I tried 5650, 5600, and 5500 with all variables the same, ( oat, baro, altitude, clean blades, 1/2 fuel, etc ). My original prop was a 3 blade Neuform and was flown just prior to the e-prop for comparison. 5650 and 5600 numbers were ok but the 5500 numbers were much better. Climb rpm now is 5300 at 1300-1400 ft/min, as opposed to 5000 rpm and 1100-1200 ft/min (less load on engine in climb). Cruise at 5400 is 115-116kts, at 5200 I get what I used to with the Neuform at 5400. Takeoff distance is much shorter( less than 6 kts wind today). A major difference for me is much less vibration, I used to get vibration when transitioning from cruise to reduced power settings in a descent until stabilized (I have heard others complain about this). Now I get no vibration. The prop also stops much easier due to being much lighter in weight. In evaluating this prop I tried not to split hairs, even with turbulence today. To me I had obvious performance increases but I am sure others will have to do their own evaluations, pilots and planes are all different.
  25. Leave your anti collision light switch on, if you forget to turn off the master you will know when you get out of the plane. This works in any aircraft.
  • Create New...