VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > RV Firewall Forward Section > Propellers
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-20-2009, 07:36 AM
wickedsprint wickedsprint is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 100
Default Why does 3 blade MT have longer TBO than 2 blade for (I)O-320?

So in looking through MT's downloads, I notice the MTV-11-C/183-59 2 blade has a TBO of 1000hrs while the MTV-12-C/180-119d (57) 3 blade has a full 2000hr TBO. The are props for the 320. The file is the Supp_sb1 one, and it names both props directly.
__________________
-Tony
Cheyenne WY/ Iraq
Private pilot...still in research stage for a -8
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-20-2009, 10:25 AM
osxuser's Avatar
osxuser osxuser is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pasadena CA
Posts: 2,484
Default

Just a stab in the dark, but isn't the 2 blade newer? Perhaps they are working up to a long TBO. Either way, chances are it will calender out and need an overhaul before you hit 1000 hrs.
__________________
Stephen Samuelian, CFII, A&P IA, CTO
RV4 wing in Jig @ KPOC
RV7 emp built
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-20-2009, 10:57 AM
Norman CYYJ Norman CYYJ is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Victoria B.C.
Posts: 1,265
Default

Maybe its cuz the time is spread out over 3 blades instead of 2
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-20-2009, 02:05 PM
DGlaeser DGlaeser is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Rochester Hills, MI
Posts: 878
Default Dynamics?

I suspect it is the dynamic pulsing effect on prop fatigue life. 3 blade props have different natural frequencies - maybe don't get as close to a prop harmonic as a 2 blade? Just a guess.
__________________
Dennis Glaeser CFII
Rochester Hills, MI
RV-7A - Eggenfellner H6, GRT Sport ES, EIS4000, 300XL, SL30, TT Gemini, PMA6000, AK950L, GT320,
uAvionixEcho ADSB in/out with GRT Safe Fly GPS
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-03-2009, 09:51 AM
RVjim's Avatar
RVjim RVjim is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 196
Default MT flight hour TBO

Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedsprint View Post
So in looking through MT's downloads, I notice the MTV-11-C/183-59 2 blade has a TBO of 1000hrs while the MTV-12-C/180-119d (57) 3 blade has a full 2000hr TBO. The are props for the 320. The file is the Supp_sb1 one, and it names both props directly.
The flight hour TBO is established by EASA (Europian FAA) standards for new propeller designs.

The 1000 hr TBO is given for new propeller designed that is VERY similar to an existing design.

The 1800 hr TBO is given for a propeller that has gone through all of the vibration testing, etc., required for an STC on a certified aircraft.

The 2000 hr TBO is a time increase based on 3 of the same 1800 hr. propellers being overhauled without excessive wear before the 6 year TBO time.

A maximum flight time TBO of 2500 hrs is possible for propellers used on a reciprocating engine.

Service Bulletin 1 is a constantly changing document. When your propeller is getting close to the flight hour TBO, that is the time to look at service bulletin 1.

Jim Ayers
FAA Repair Station # LDSR535X
MT Propeller
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-07-2009, 08:11 AM
wickedsprint wickedsprint is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 100
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RVjim View Post

Service Bulletin 1 is a constantly changing document. When your propeller is getting close to the flight hour TBO, that is the time to look at service bulletin 1.

Jim Ayers
FAA Repair Station # LDSR535X
MT Propeller
I have to respectfully disagree. I will look at all manufacturer's public data when I am doing research for something as expensive and critical as a propeller...and I will do so as early in the process as I deem fit. Ideally before I buy it.
__________________
-Tony
Cheyenne WY/ Iraq
Private pilot...still in research stage for a -8
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-08-2009, 10:38 PM
RVjim's Avatar
RVjim RVjim is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 196
Default MT Propeller documents & information

Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedsprint View Post
I have to respectfully disagree. I will look at all manufacturer's public data when I am doing research for something as expensive and critical as a propeller...and I will do so as early in the process as I deem fit. Ideally before I buy it.
I don't mind if you disagree. But I don't understand what you are disagreeing about.

I made a simple statement about how Service Bulletin 1 is actually managed.

As an insight into the flight hour verse 6 year TBO I suggest this.
For a propeller with a 1000 flight hour TBO, or six years, whichever occurs first;
the aircraft would need to be flown about 170 hours per year to get the 1000 flight hours before 6 years is up.
Or over 300 flight hours per year to get 1800 flight hours within 6 years time.

From an annual maintenance stand point:
With the MT Propeller, there is no annual maintenance (no grease added into the hub) on the propeller.

And Serive Bulletin 16 shouldn't be overloooked as a resource for any RPM restrictions on the MT Propellers.
If this isn't a certified aircraft, scroll down to the experimental aircraft/engine section.

Jim Ayers

Last edited by RVjim : 05-08-2009 at 10:39 PM. Reason: spelling correction
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-09-2009, 03:42 AM
wickedsprint wickedsprint is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 100
Default

I thought you were inferring that one should not look at this stuff and consider the TBO limits until they are near, vs. taking them into consideration as one of the comparisons we make when trying to choose between different propellers.
__________________
-Tony
Cheyenne WY/ Iraq
Private pilot...still in research stage for a -8
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-09-2009, 09:46 AM
RVjim's Avatar
RVjim RVjim is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 196
Default About data

Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedsprint View Post
I thought you were inferring that one should not look at this stuff and consider the TBO limits until they are near, vs. taking them into consideration as one of the comparisons we make when trying to choose between different propellers.
Sometimes knowing how the data is managed is as important as the data itself.

MT Propeller Service Bulletin 16 identifies the RPM restrictions on different MT Propeller and engine combinations. The RPM restriction data for a particular propeller and engine isn't likely too change.

Service Bulletin 1 identifies the flight hour and years of service TBO.
The years of service TBO isn't likely to change.
The flight hour TBO for reciprocating engines is presently limited to a maximum of 2500 hours. The current TBO for a particular MT Propeller is listed in Service bulletin 1.
As certain different events occur, the current listed flight hour TBO will be increased to a 2500 flight hour TBO.
I believe the 1800 flight hour TBO is the highest TBO MT Propeller, as the manufacturer, can obtain directly.
Then it requires three propellers being overhauled at the current flight hour TBO before the 6 year TBO expires to get an increase in the flight hour TBO. MT Propellers used on aircraft for flight training are usually the first to get to the 2500 flight hour TBO.

Bottom line. Get your aircraft flying. And fly often.

Jim Ayers
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:36 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.