ARC propellers and MOSAIC.. and Hello!

[HelixCarbon]

Hi all,

My name is Jesse. I work for a small propeller manufacturer in Germany. We are currently working on bringing a new constant speed composite propeller design to the US market ahead of the upcoming MOSAIC rules changes and I thought it might be fun to open up a discussion and see what kind of questions / comments / concerns you might have.

Particularly (potentially?) interesting is the blade geometry of the new ARC propellers vs more traditional (NRC / TRC) propellers (namely: the forward- or advanced- curvature of the blade, as opposed to scimitar or straight blade types), and I would be happy to answer questions or go into detail if anyone’s interested.

We are also looking to gather feedback from pilots who’d be interested in comparing this type of propeller against their current setup in real-world flying.

So don't be shy and I will do my best to answer any questions..

Cheers!

PS.. for what kind of post is the fish icon suitable?

[Pilot DAR]

Welcome Helix,

Propeller discussion will be great, but within the rules of PPRuNe, no direct advertising please...

[HelixCarbon]

Understood- is the post ok as it is or should I change something?

[Pilot DAR]

is the post ok as it is or should I change something?

The post is okay, as long as PPRuNe rules about [no] advertising are respected.

[EXDAC]

I was curious and found a little more here - https://helix-propeller.de/propeller...rc-propellers/

Not sure I'd want to abandon my Hartzell Trailblazer but a bit curious as to what ARC prop would replace it and in what respects it would be better. (Lycoming YIO-360).

I fly off short unprepared surfaces so particularly interested in static thrust and resistance to erosion and chipping.

[Bug]

HelixCarbon

I see a photo of a Stampe with your prop.
Interested to know how it compares to Hoffmann in a Stampe SV4 with Gypsy 10/2.

[BoeingBoy]

I would love a modern technology propellor on my Piper Archer but sadly I'm tied to using the Sensenich prop listed in the aircraft manual. EASA/CAA Part 21 aircraft are poorly served by current legislation. We could be saving fuel and operating our engines more efficiently.

Good luck with your venture anyway.

[wrench1]

Originally Posted by HelixCarbon

We are currently working on bringing a new constant speed composite propeller design to the US market ahead of the upcoming MOSAIC rules changes

As you mention MOSAIC, are your props intended for S-LSA market? If so, you may want to direct your initial efforts toward the LSA manufacturers as altering these aircraft with a new prop will require authorization to perform the replacement, which currently can only come from the manufacturer. There is a sub-group of LSAs under E-LSA (experimental-LSA) in the US that do not require that authorization to install, but it is small in numbers when compared to S-LSA numbers.

[Pilot DAR]

From my experience approving STC'd propeller changes, I'm aware of the possible effects of "more" blade area than the propeller being replaced. In the case of an engine failure, it can noticeably change the glide characteristics of the plane. I observed this after changing from a Hartzell two blade to am MT three blade on my flying boat. The power off, fine pitch glide rate of descent went from 1100 FRM (difficult, but doable) to 1600 FPM (very difficult to land from, particularly on the water). Selecting coarse pitch upon power loss returns the glide to being 1100 FPM, and it's okay. When I flight tested the RED diesel Beaver, I found a similar high rate of descent with the windmilling propeller, other than with the the FADEC set up, I did not have a propeller control, so I could not reduce the rate of descent, other than to slow the plane to the point where the prop would stop entirely, then the glide was okay again.

This is an awareness thing, if you understand how the plane glides with the prop of your choice, and can be okay with that, that's fine. But, if I'm doing an STC to approve the prop on a type certified airplane (pre MOSAIC), I might be test flying it to assure that in the case of engine failure, the airplane will glide somewhere near what the flight manual says it will. My flying boat would have been a severe "no" in that regard after the change, other than the procedure to select coarse (which is not a flight manual procedure for that type) which made it acceptable.

Thrust is great, but you have to know how it will be if it quits too!

[megan]

In the case of an engine failure, it can noticeably change the glide characteristics of the plane

Are folk aware that drag is least with a non feathering prop is when the prop is stopped?

[EXDAC]

Originally Posted by megan

Are folk aware that drag is least with a non feathering prop is when the prop is stopped?

Well I was. The Trailblazer on my aircraft stays in full fine pitch at best glide speed even with the prop lever pulled to full coarse. Stopping the prop gives a significant improvement in glide ratio.

[Pilot DAR]

Are folk aware that drag is least with a non feathering prop is when the prop is stopped?

Yes, I have tested for this, and did mention it with respect to the RED diesel Beaver flight testing I had done. That principle is simply understood as to why autorotation works for a helicopter. It will descent very much faster if the rotor stops!

[HelixCarbon]

Hey! Sorry I am responding so late- Got caught up at work.. and now I'm on my way out for the weekend- but I will do my best to answer everyone on monday..

[HelixCarbon]

Originally Posted by EXDAC

Not sure I'd want to abandon my Hartzell Trailblazer but a bit curious as to what ARC prop would replace it and in what respects it would be better. (Lycoming YIO-360).

I fly off short unprepared surfaces so particularly interested in static thrust and resistance to erosion and chipping.

Hi! We work a lot with STOL aircraft but don't yet have anything endurance tested on lycoming. We are considering it if there it enough interest.. it would be more a matter of if the internal mechanics of the hub hold up to the vibrations, than anything to do with the ARC profile.. if you want to get in touch with someone more involved in the development and certification stuffs, feel free to hit us up.. ask about the H60A or H62A- one of those would probably be the one we would put on a lycoming.

[HelixCarbon]

Originally Posted by Bug

HelixCarbon

I see a photo of a Stampe with your prop.
Interested to know how it compares to Hoffmann in a Stampe SV4 with Gypsy 10/2.

Ooo- if we're both talking about the same picture- that is a fixed-pitch NRC propeller on a Kiebitz, I would have to dig around a little to find out exactly which one. The ARC's (at least- our ARC blades) really require a constant speed hub for best performance, and while that's technically possible- it may be a while before we go down that road : )

[HelixCarbon]

Originally Posted by BoeingBoy

I would love a modern technology propellor on my Piper Archer but sadly I'm tied to using the Sensenich prop listed in the aircraft manual. EASA/CAA Part 21 aircraft are poorly served by current legislation. We could be saving fuel and operating our engines more efficiently.

Good luck with your venture anyway.

I feel your pain... especially here in Germany- you're not allowed to sneeze without first getting it certified by three different government agencies : )

[HelixCarbon]

Originally Posted by wrench1

As you mention MOSAIC, are your props intended for S-LSA market? If so, you may want to direct your initial efforts toward the LSA manufacturers as altering these aircraft with a new prop will require authorization to perform the replacement, which currently can only come from the manufacturer. There is a sub-group of LSAs under E-LSA (experimental-LSA) in the US that do not require that authorization to install, but it is small in numbers when compared to S-LSA numbers.

JMB, Aerospool and Alpi have already begun a partial adoption of our props- they haven't put us on all of their planes yet : ) but fingers crossed. We are also pretty active with experimental aircraft.

[wrench1]

Originally Posted by HelixCarbon

JMB, Aerospool and Alpi have already begun a partial adoption of our props- they haven't put us on all of their planes yet : ) but fingers crossed. We are also pretty active with experimental aircraft.

What is your potential timeline to establish your market in the US? For example, the EASA LSAs you mention above still have restrictions on their importation into the US and it won't be until July 2026 the new Part 22 LSA certification rules are released. If your timeline is shorter than a couple of years, you may want to contact current US based LSA manufacturers so that your props can be considered before the new rules go live.

As to the amateur-built market, any new prop usually requires a return to the Phase 1 flight testing requirement. Have you started any testing with Lycoming or Continental engines which are the predominant engine in that market? If not, you may want to start that sooner than later if that is also a target market. Good luck.

[HelixCarbon]

Originally Posted by wrench1

What is your potential timeline to establish your market in the US? For example, the EASA LSAs you mention above still have restrictions on their importation into the US and it won't be until July 2026 the new Part 22 LSA certification rules are released. If your timeline is shorter than a couple of years, you may want to contact current US based LSA manufacturers so that your props can be considered before the new rules go live.

As to the amateur-built market, any new prop usually requires a return to the Phase 1 flight testing requirement. Have you started any testing with Lycoming or Continental engines which are the predominant engine in that market? If not, you may want to start that sooner than later if that is also a target market. Good luck.

We haven't done any significant testing with lycoming / conti.. we've been focused on a rotax for a long time (German UL market, for example), but lycoming at least is on the horizon for us, and we have a couple propellers that would be well suited to larger direct drive engines (including a brand new monster prop that- on paper- can handle up to 1000hp.. we'll be officially unveiling it at the AERO Friedrichshafen end of April)..

I will have to ask our engineers and the sales team about specific details, but the plan as far as I can tell is to reach individual owners first and use that as proof of concept for the manufacturers.. If we were just selling another propeller- timing might be more of an issue.. but we have seen over and over how our ARC's perform compared to competing setups, and how people react to flying with them and I am confident that they will be widely adopted- even if not immediately..

[wrench1]

Originally Posted by HelixCarbon

but the plan as far as I can tell is to reach individual owners first and use that as proof of concept for the manufacturers.

You may want to readdress that plan. The individual owners of an S-LSA in the US will not be able to install your prop on their aircraft unless the manufacturer provides the acceptable data as it is considered a major alteration. Now if the owner elects to convert their S-LSA to an E-LSA in order to install your prop then it would not need the mfgr. data, however, they may run across a different problem similar to what an amateur-built (E/AB) owner would face installing your prop. And at the E/AB level a new prop install with no engine history behind it, will probably push the aircraft major change required Phase 1 flight testing beyond the typical 5 hours and possibly out to the 25-40 hour requirement. Something to think about.