![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
... Superb! Only thing; I thought the Ju52 had three-bladed props. Other than that, it's an excellent model. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Alan Erskine" wrote in
: "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message ... Superb! Only thing; I thought the Ju52 had three-bladed props. Other than that, it's an excellent model. The models of the Corsair and the Avenger also have two-bladed props instead of three. Must be an R/C thing. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Often it all depends on the engine. More powerful engine, more blades.
Here is a Tante Ju with two blade props. http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviatio.../7/1365704.jpg Waldo. On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:53:51 GMT, "Alan Erskine" wrote: Superb! Only thing; I thought the Ju52 had three-bladed props. Other than that, it's an excellent model. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
... "Alan Erskine" wrote in : "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message ... Superb! Only thing; I thought the Ju52 had three-bladed props. Other than that, it's an excellent model. The models of the Corsair and the Avenger also have two-bladed props instead of three. Must be an R/C thing. I thought it might be an 'engine thing'. Thanks Mitchell and Waldo. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Waldo.Pepper" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
... Often it all depends on the engine. More powerful engine, more blades. Here is a Tante Ju with two blade props. http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviatio.../7/1365704.jpg Waldo. On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:53:51 GMT, "Alan Erskine" wrote: Superb! Only thing; I thought the Ju52 had three-bladed props. Other than that, it's an excellent model. Most of the JU52/3M were built with either BMW or Pratt & Whittney engines. The BMW version has originally two blade props and the P&W version has 3 blade props. The P&W engines are providing more power, therefore, as mentioned above the need for 3 blade probs. But the sound is not the same....:-) -- Gruß Guybrush |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Did the Germans just buy the P&W's or did they manufacture them in Germany?
Most of the JU52/3M were built with either BMW or Pratt & Whittney engines. The BMW version has originally two blade props and the P&W version has 3 blade props. The P&W engines are providing more power, therefore, as mentioned above the need for 3 blade probs. But the sound is not the same....:-) -- Gruß Guybrush |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hello;
Alan Erskine a écrit : Superb! Only thing; I thought the Ju52 had three-bladed props. Other than that, it's an excellent model. Here's view of two different propellers sets : http://www.warbirdz.net/largepic.php?ID=2365 Bye |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "D. St-Sanvain" schreef in bericht ... Hello; Alan Erskine a écrit : Superb! Only thing; I thought the Ju52 had three-bladed props. Other than that, it's an excellent model. Here's view of two different propellers sets : http://www.warbirdz.net/largepic.php?ID=2365 Bye I thought most wartime Ju-52/3m's had 2-bladed props. Possibly CASA examples or other post war aircraft (with different engines) had 3-bladed props to cope with increased power. Regards, Herman |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I thought most wartime Ju-52/3m's had 2-bladed props.
Possibly CASA examples or other post war aircraft (with different engines) had 3-bladed props to cope with increased power. Long to short, what most people are discussing is whether the RC models had the correct historic prop on them. What may be going on is what is necessary for models to work well, not the ignoring of the proper props. g When RC planes are done to high levels of historic accuracy, still, the props are many times the wrong number of blades or the wrong diameter. When it is being displayed, a historically accurate prop is put on, then changed out before flying. Reynolds numbers, and scalability of areas and weight does not allow most engines to operate with a correct prop, unless luck comes to play, or some extra complexity (gearing) comes into the application. A 2 blade prop is more efficient than a 3 blade, and a 3 blade better than a 4 blade. Full sized Reynolds numbers don't hurt full sized applications as much as it hurts model sized props. Still, the fact remains that 3 and 4 blade (and sometimes more) props are needed to harness the huge power outputs of the full sized engines, without getting the diameter overly large. So, I guess what I am try to say, for those that are not very familiar with RC scale planes, the builder was probably not ignoring what prop was used for the full sized plane, but was just doing what he needed to do to have maximum power output harnessed from the engine that was being used. That's my take, anywho! g -- Jim in NC |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
MAE : Junkers D1 | jmp | Aviation Photos | 0 | February 25th 08 08:43 PM |
Ju 88 - Junkers Ju-88A.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman | Aviation Photos | 0 | January 8th 08 12:53 PM |
Winter Flying, pt 3 - Junkers W-34.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman[_2_] | Aviation Photos | 0 | February 1st 07 01:34 PM |
Winter Flying, pt 3 - Junkers W34f.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman[_2_] | Aviation Photos | 0 | February 1st 07 01:34 PM |
Winter Flying, pt 3 - Junkers Stukas und Lufttranspoter 7-10.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman[_2_] | Aviation Photos | 0 | February 1st 07 01:34 PM |