6A with O-320 fixed prop

[drmax]

Hello. I'm still looking for a 6A and wanted opinion on whether a 0-320 fixed pitch would work for me with a 2100' hard surface with trees on either end.
Rwy is also narrower than most, but that's beside the point. Seems theres a bigger variety with this pwrplant/prop setup. My mission, is for local flying as well as cross country. (more local) I would have it loaded up most likely.
I'm at Indiana at around 700 msl.
Thx for any advice

 

[Mel]

ShortStop Airfield (8TA5)

I've been operating my -6 with a F/P prop out of my 1500' X 20' (640' elevation) runway for a lot of years. I do have clear approaches but you have enough runway to compensate for the trees.
The -6A should be able to land slightly shorter because you can attain a higher AOA on touch-down.

Having said that, it has more to do with how comfortable you are with short runways. I have several friends who won't come into my strip.

BTW, if your runway is 700' AGL, you have other problems. I think you meant 700' MSL.

 

[drmax]

I've been operating my -6 with a F/P prop out of my 1500' X 20' (640' elevation) runway for a lot of years. I do have clear approaches but you have enough runway to compensate for the trees.
The -6A should be able to land slightly shorter because you can attain a higher AOA on touch-down.

Having said that, it has more to do with how comfortable you are with short runways. I have several friends who won't come into my strip.

BTW, if your runway is 700' AGL, you have other problems. I think you meant 700' MSL.

uh, yes on the msl...head in the fog this early a.m. and changed that thx. Ok, so I didn't want to skimp on this when I'm getting the equipment together. You didn't mentioned your eng size? I've seen a few 320 with c/s props and didn't know if that'd make any great difference. When I get this figured out, i'll know which style to hone in on. Another thing I've seen more of is tip ups...and from what I gather, it's only beneficial to the hot days for taxing. That's another common plane to see for sale, vs the tip up...more of them. I'd be comfortable after much practicing, but didn't want to be white knuckling loaded up, every time i took off. Thx for the advice.

 

[Mel]

As in my signature, I have a "hopped-up" O-320.
But I flew out of my strip back when it was 150hp.

 

[Snowflake]

My home field is a 2100' strip, my O-320 is bone stock as far as I know. The field does not have trees, but: Getting off, i'm always high enough on departure by the end of the runway that tree clearance isn't an issue. Landing, I could easily get it down and stopped in a little over half the runway length, but I usually let it roll out to the end or the next taxiway, whichever is first. With practise, you should be fine.

 

[drmax]

As in my signature, I have a "hopped-up" O-320.
But I flew out of my strip back when it was 150hp.

ok, so sound like it'd work. were you loaded up pretty good? i didn't want to scare my wife too bad...
Would I gain better performance taking off with c/s?

 

[Skysailor]

CS will have better takeoff performance but not needed

I have an RV6A with a stock O-360-nothing with a wood fixed pitch prop. No kidding, the engine has no suffix as it is one of the originals. As such, it is the 150 HP version. You will have no trouble out of that strip if the airplane is flown properly even loaded with your wife (and all of the ground support equipment that usually entails) as long as you do not load in excess of max gross weight.

If you view Van's video you will see the airplanes can be flown from fields well under 1000' if the approaches are clear. The plane should take off in 600' or so. You may want to consider calculating the actual usable length of your field given the height and distance of the trees to the end of the runway.

You will get dramatically better performance with a constant speed an I would highly recommend this if it is an option. The real reason is that there is no compromise in performance other than the significant increase in weight over a light wood or composite fixed pitch. You have heard fixed pitch props described as climb or cruise props. This is because they are optimized for one regime or the other. A constant speed will do both. The engine will develop full rated power on takeoff since it will automatically adjust blade angle to allow the engine to turn the 2700 RPM required to make rated power. No fixed pitch will turn up to 2700 RPM on takeoff so you are actually making significantly less than rated power. If you have the low pitch of a climb prop, the plane will have better takeoff performance than a cruise prop but still far less than a constant speed. As a bonus, the CS will help in the landing phase as well since when power is reduced, the blade pitch goes flat which will provide a very nice decelleration feature.

A CS will be more weight and money but will yield much better takeoff and cruise performance.

 

[drmax]

I have an RV6A with a stock O-360-nothing with a wood fixed pitch prop. No kidding, the engine has no suffix as it is one of the originals. As such, it is the 150 HP version. You will have no trouble out of that strip if the airplane is flown properly even loaded with your wife (and all of the ground support equipment that usually entails) as long as you do not load in excess of max gross weight.

If you view Van's video you will see the airplanes can be flown from fields well under 1000' if the approaches are clear. The plane should take off in 600' or so. You may want to consider calculating the actual usable length of your field given the height and distance of the trees to the end of the runway.

You will get dramatically better performance with a constant speed an I would highly recommend this if it is an option. The real reason is that there is no compromise in performance other than the significant increase in weight over a light wood or composite fixed pitch. You have heard fixed pitch props described as climb or cruise props. This is because they are optimized for one regime or the other. A constant speed will do both. The engine will develop full rated power on takeoff since it will automatically adjust blade angle to allow the engine to turn the 2700 RPM required to make rated power. No fixed pitch will turn up to 2700 RPM on takeoff so you are actually making significantly less than rated power. If you have the low pitch of a climb prop, the plane will have better takeoff performance than a cruise prop but still far less than a constant speed. As a bonus, the CS will help in the landing phase as well since when power is reduced, the blade pitch goes flat which will provide a very nice decelleration feature.

A CS will be more weight and money but will yield much better takeoff and cruise performance.

Good information. You wrote that well. Thank you

 

[Omega232Devils]

WW GA Prop

Although you will be fine with an O-320 and FP as others have described. Just know you can very easily do a quick, and rather inexpensive, upgrade to a ground adjustable prop, like the WW GA prop and get great performance boost and flexibility.
Two guys at my field have upgraded from a Sensenich FP to the WW GA prop, one with 320 and one with 360 and both will not stop talking about the immediate change in performance.
If you find a good deal on a FP RV I would not turn up your nose. These are great aircraft and will perform beautifully.

 

[rmac1376]

Think no farther than a Catto prop. I have 600 hours on my RV-6, 150hp and get 1500 fpm, 2270rpm at sea level, ksna. you will have no problem! GO CATTO!!!!

 

[drmax]

yeah, i'll get whatever comes on the plane. heard those catco props are nice. was thinking along the lines of finding smaller eng/fixed pitch prop and then hopefully it'd have a/p and some nice avionics. just a hunt/waiting period. also transition in a guys rv7 now, so i'm deciding on either a 6 or 6A. thx for all the info.