Spectre623 Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 Saw in the LM Code One mag where the AF has paid $36 mil for the RR 3.5 engine upgrade for all H's. Specs on a P3 have shown a 12% savings on fuel. Good deal! Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Railrunner130 Posted October 24, 2015 Share Posted October 24, 2015 Any idea how it will be implemented? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectre623 Posted October 24, 2015 Author Share Posted October 24, 2015 The article didn't say anything about how or when. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hehe Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 I've heard it will be changed all 4 engines at a time. Kind of like a tcto. Just what I have heard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyclark Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 Why not go to the Dowdy prop and get rid of the prop problems? But, I'm just an avionics pinhead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdaley Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 Didn't the dowdy prop factory just burn to the ground? But I agree, it seems to have a lot few problems.Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spectre623 Posted October 25, 2015 Author Share Posted October 25, 2015 (edited) Why not go with the Ham Stand 8 blade fan? More perk for the Herk! Then we would have it made in the shade...you know, Less flux for the bucks! Ha Ha Bill Edited October 25, 2015 by Spectre623 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHeflin Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 Which brings up an interesting point.... any feedback from the NYANG? Didin't they have one/some of their aircraft modified with the 8-blade props? Be interested to see some data on how it worked out.Back in the early J-model days the Dowty 6-blade did have some issues with delamination but I understand that's been cured. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjvr99 Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 Hamilton-Sundstrand NP2000 is for the T56/501 engines. Saw some pics a while back of a ski-130 with the NP2000 in the ice - looks good. Dont remember where I got this, but its one of the best I've seen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hehe Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 I believe that picture is from wyoming guard when they were testing the props.They tested them before the LC-130's got them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMPTestFE Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 That picture is from the Edwards test period.The navy has been flying the 8-bladed prop for years. I hear nothing but positive stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerfManJ Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 The Rolls Royce Series 3.5 engine upgrade is separate from any plans to use the NP2000 (8-blade) prop. Series 3.5 is an internal upgrade to several components of the T56 to improve fuel efficiency. Coincidentally, USAF used the same Wyoming ANG bird for the NP2000 and single-engine Series 3.5 test at Edwards. Then NOAA conducted their own 4-engine test on their P-3.Now, if USAF would combine the NP2000 and Series 3.5...that would be a sporty Herk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyclark Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 Seems like the T56 is OK for reliability issues, the prop SUCKS. I'd take better prop reliability over a bit of engine performance. But, I'm just a dumb pointy head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Railrunner130 Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 From what I can gather, the NP2000 prop has some weird performance issues in cruise. The AF had a hard time justifying it because they couldn't prove a fuel burn/cost savings. You'd think the maintenance cost savings (not to mention the savings in the WRSK bins) would justify it, but that's not how they look at it. Above all though, we need to have ADSB-compliant radios. All the fuel savings and improved performance don't mean a thing if you can't fly the mission. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMPTestFE Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 The NP2000 has been funded for several years I think...maybe just for the ski birds though.I agree with you Railrunner, the maintenance savings on the new prop should have mx driving the change...just like the autopilot & radar upgrades. We only got those because the cost of maintaining the E-4 & APN-59 were too high.AMP increment 1 is intended to install ADS-B concerns, as far as I'm aware. It's not the radios, it's the transponder & GPS. A mil GPS system does not meet the requirements....just ask the J folks about that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerfManJ Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 NP2000 evaluation has been funded on and off for the past several years, but I believe the props have only been installed on a WYANG bird for the formal flight test and a Skibird for an operational test. The Skibirds will be the first to get them (once funding is approved) since they need the extra takeoff thrust to get off the ice in Greenland and Antarctica without JATO. The Skibirds have been the driver behind NP2000 for C-130s...but of course several other groups are interested in the extra performance as well.There is not much cruise fuel efficiency improvement with NP2000 (that's where the Series 3.5 engine really shines), but there is a major boost in low speed thrust. Plus many reliability and maintainability improvements over the 54H60. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.