Jump to content
Aero Precision provides OEM part support for military aircraft operators across more than 20 aircraft
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

8 bladed Prop

Recommended Posts

So how many test flight did they accomplish, and it sounds as if the Air Force did not take the time to completely finish testing and compare data. I would thing that the testing would take prority over sending an airplane to the Desert since aircraft performance and fuel effiency would be a prority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AMPTestFE wrote:

This is a National Guard program. We\'re here to support. Until AMC comes up with the desire and the funds, it\'s their (ANG) show.

After reading your inputs I gotta say that it sounds like it was a goat rope.

What\'s wrong with using Snow Aviations stats and data?

Sounds like they didn\'t look at the data from the Hawkeyes either.

Gotta tell ya, there\'s a little bit of difference between the LC-130\'s and the \"slicks\".

So does that mean that the USAF/ANG is going to have to do tests all over again with the LC-130\'s \"just to make sure\"?

It took you guys a week to get an engine?

WTF, Channel Islands/NAS Point Mugu is about 40 minutes away as the crow flys.

You mean the CA ANG didn\'t have an engine? :blink:

Those NP2000 props will be just the ticket for Antarctic ops, now they\'ll really be able to over-torque engines down there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LC130LOAD1 wrote:

AMPTestFE wrote:

After reading your inputs I gotta say that it sounds like it was a goat rope.

What\'s wrong with using Snow Aviations stats and data?

Sounds like they didn\'t look at the data from the Hawkeyes either.

Gotta tell ya, there\'s a little bit of difference between the LC-130\'s and the \"slicks\".

So does that mean that the USAF/ANG is going to have to do tests all over again with the LC-130\'s \"just to make sure\"?

It took you guys a week to get an engine?

WTF, Channel Islands/NAS Point Mugu is about 40 minutes away as the crow flys.

You mean the CA ANG didn\'t have an engine? :blink:

Those NP2000 props will be just the ticket for Antarctic ops, now they\'ll really be able to over-torque engines down there.

Hard to go to Channel Island, they have J\'s now, not a -15 to be had. The hope is to get more usable thrust for the same torque, a more effecient prop, as for Snow data they modified the plane that will not be done so their data is not accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snow Aviation\'s data is from an aircraft that has been aerodynamically modified. It\'s not useable.

Ditto for the Hawkeyes.

There may be some difference on the LC-130, but not nearly as much.

Not sure about any other tests.

Yes, it took a week to get an engine through the standard AF supply system.

Channel Islands doesn\'t have C-130Hs, therefore, we can\'t get an engine from them. Point Magu is Navy; the AF supply system doesn\'t work that way.

The torque doesn\'t change, it\'s the efficiency in which the prop utilizes the same torque value.

Any other questions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a picture of a LC-130H configured with the Hamilton Sundstrand NP2000 8-bladed propellers. [img size=1280]http://herkybirds.com/images/fbfiles/images/Picture_034_2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this just an initial trail to assess the viablity and gather performance data on the ski birds or will the NP2000 remain installed for the up coming summer season in NZ.

Are there any plans to roll this out to the rest of the LC130\'s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AMPTestFE wrote:

Point Magu is Navy; the AF supply system doesn\'t work that way.

Mugu, not Magu.

I thought that the Channel Island ANG still had a couple of E\'s or H\'s.

I was also thinking that someone somewhere could have asked the ANG or the Navy Reserves to pick up an AF T56 instead of waiting a week.

So do you know if the USAF/ANG is going to put the NP2000 props on all of the LC-130\'s or only the military owned ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have been hearing here at Stratton. Is that 92 will be going to the ice for tests during the ODF season. If it performs the way they expect it should we may see all the LC-130 with 8 blades. Pretty expensive venture for the ANG to take on. I hope we do get them for good, Its a lot more quiet when they are flying locals over my house. It sucks being in the flight path. LOL...I can work on the all day don\'t what to listen to them at night...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It\'s never as easy as calling someone up to bring you some parts, here at Edwards. The system doesn\'t work quickly or efficiently here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

AMPTestFE wrote:

It\'s never as easy as calling someone up to bring you some parts, here at Edwards. The system doesn\'t work quickly or efficiently here.

In the past I have wondered why Edwards likes to proclaim that they are \"THE ultimate\" Air Force Flight Test Center, but they are unable to quickly and efficiently support logistics requirements for airplanes on the ramp for extended flight test periods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Saw 30492 come into Christchurch, New Zealand.

What a different sound....still an LC though.

Sounded like an overgrown ATR-72.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Saw 30492 come into Christchurch , New Zealand.

Sounded like an overgroen ATR, but still an LC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

This NP 2000 prop, is it the same one as fitted to the Hawkeye 2000 ?

Does 30492 still have T-56-A-15 engines or are they J engines ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thread - I’ve been involved with the testing of both the electronic propeller control system (EPCS) and the 8 bladed propeller (NP2000) for the last 6 years so maybe I can clear up some of the misconceptions and misinformation. If I miss something let me know.

The reason the USAF is testing these is to determine suitability for the various missions supported by the C-130. EPCS offers a lot of potential R&M benefits as well as superior RPM control, synchrophasing, and unlimited transient response to throttle inputs. The design of the NP2000 blades offers additional thrust at take off and climb out speeds as well extremely low noise. The reason we opted to use USAF aircraft for this test is that we really needed a complete assessment of the systems (to include all of the sustainability/logistic issues) without any of the aerodynamic modifications added by Snow. The data developed by Snow was primarily to support a demo and so was not under anywhere near the rigor required to produce a performance manual -- we actually did use the data but primarily as a risk reduction tool. We have been using the aircraft at Schenectady and at Cheyenne for various reasons. We purposely structured the flight testing so that we could enter into operational flight testing in Antarctica ASAP while generating data that could be used to develop a performance manual. Additionally, having two aircraft is test allows us the flexibility to assess these systems while performing various missions. The results have been promising but not without any hitches. As much of the testing is in work or being reported on, it would be inappropriate to provide any details. Keeping in mind I am an engineer (not an FE) and not an operator, I can provide some general comments about the handling qualities. Many of the problems (high Vmca, high Vmcg, unacceptable stall characteristics) encountered by the C-130J were primarily because of constraints imposed by the FAA. Yes, Vmca and Vmcg will be a little higher but not excessively so. The power off stall characteristics of the NP2000 suffer a little in comparison to the 54H60 but the power on stall characteristics are almost identical to 54H60 configured aircraft -- I think this was a surprise to everyone involved. The stall characteristics we saw with the 54H60 propellers would preclude the legacy C-130E/H fleet from complying with FAA guidance without a stick pusher like the C-130J. Another comment I would add is the noise -- MUCH quieter both outside the aircraft and inside -- we are planning on characterizing this at WSMR later this year. In summary, the testing EPCS and NP2000 has been promising but the MAJCOMs are under a lot of pressure to stretch dollars so it is TBD whether these mods will transition to permanent configurations. I’ve attached some photo’s of the flight testing at Edwards, Schenectady, and Antarctica.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the insight & update.

As a pilot, I'll take high Vmca anyday - it means my powerplants are producing more thrust overall and I will very likely be able to reduce assymetrical power and still remain airborne if an issue. High Vmca are a red herring, IMO - FAA be damned. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll second on the noise opinion. This was such a nicer Herc to fly than the legacy props! Noise & vibration were down considerably. I think AMC should find the capitol now & invest in the EPCS, as a minimum. This will cut any valve housing related issues to almost nil. The props could be an easy add-on later on when the F-35 gets axed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...I’ve attached some photo’s of the flight testing at Edwards, Schenectady, and Antarctica.

Wonderful pictures, thank you very much! If you have more, please post it here. Thank you again!

Regards from Germany

Stephan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Pete,

Glad to see you're slugging it out with all of the nay-sayers....

How are things going? I ran into TS at McCain Mall about Christmastime and he said you were getting a new career here at the rock...is that true? If you make it back here, give me a shout...I have "herk" withdrawals working with these damn Falcons.....

Jerry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

You heard right, I am employed locally now, and can't be more thankfull for both this job & leaving the last organization.

So, you are no longer chasing the rabbits off the runway in the High Desert, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...