Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Beech Starship

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

Eric M. Jones

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 565
Location: Massachusetts

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 6:01 am Post subject: Beech Starship

(Do Not Archive)



There are those who believe that putting propellers behind airfoils, instead of in the nose where God intended them to be, is a terrible idea. Rutan is quoted as saying that he only came to this realization very late in his designing life.



I once saw a Starship, or rather I heard the noisiest damned aircraft I had ever heard. I looked up, put my fingers in my ears, and saw the majestically beautiful Starship thousands of feet above....making a truly ugly noise that continued long after the Starship was out of sight.



Bob, funny story on the deicer. I recently reviewed a design project where 40 leds at 75 volts in series-parallel had to be dimmed. The failed and expensive PWM controller and elaborate glitch filter was a mean mess o' parts. I specified an off-the-shelf 1W-WW pot and one resistor to do the whole job.

_________________
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net

JOHN TIPTON

Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 239
Location: Torquay - England

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 7:52 am Post subject: Beech Starship

If God intended them to be at the front why did he call them 'propellers' 

!!!



---

longg(at)pjm.com
Guest

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 8:26 am Post subject: Beech Starship

Because we are lazy people and after hundreds of years of tinkering with boats and such we failed to come up with a better name. In any event, propulsion really doesn't care from which end it propels. Burt's analogy comes from the designer's perspective. Perhaps efficiency and ease of installation. There have been many automotive designs with mid and rear engines - none of them terribly successful. Porsche is an exception, but the cost of making the engineering work is not very practical for the average buyer.



Propeller - a device having a revolving hub with radiating blades, for propelling an airplane, ship, etc.



Looks like the word was developed between 1770-1780. Not much flying back in those days.



Do Not Archive



--

mapratherid(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 8:56 am Post subject: Beech Starship

If pusher props are such a bad idea, why don't boats have them on the front?  Why are airplanes different? (I have a Rutan Varieze).



Matt-



On May 16, 2011, at 10:22 AM, <longg(at)pjm.com> wrote:



[quote] 

 

 Because we are lazy people and after hundreds of years of tinkering with boats and such we failed to come up with a better name. In any event, propulsion really doesn't care from which end it propels. Burt's analogy comes from the designer's perspective. Perhaps efficiency and ease of installation. There have been many automotive designs with mid and rear engines - none of them terribly successful. Porsche is an exception, but the cost of making the engineering work is not very practical for the average buyer.

 

 Propeller - a device having a revolving hub with radiating blades, for propelling an airplane, ship, etc.

 

 Looks like the word was developed between 1770-1780. Not much flying back in those days.

 

 Do Not Archive

 

 

 

 

 

 --

Eric M. Jones

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 565
Location: Massachusetts

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 9:39 am Post subject: Re: Beech Starship

(do not archive)



Everything on an airplane got a French name while the Wright brothers were figuring out how to patent their way to fame and riches.



The French called it an Air-Screw, or just a screw (helice)

_________________
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net

stein(at)steinair.com
Guest

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 9:50 am Post subject: Beech Starship

Surprisingly, most modern large ships in fact do use tractor props mounted

on Azipods...



Cheers,

Stein 



Do not archive



--

longg(at)pjm.com
Guest

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 10:09 am Post subject: Beech Starship

I would say it is result of a boats tendency to constantly bounce out of the water - thus making the propeller far less effective when it's spinning in the air. Actually larger boats do utilize forward propellers for steering into docks when parking or making sharp turns. They work exceedingly well at slow speeds.



I don't think anyone will argue the physics of rear driven aircraft. There are some practical compromises like balance which you overcome with the praying nose wheel. That's not to say forward driven airplanes don't suffer compromises. They certainly do. This is largely about marketing to the masses and what the public is willing to accept.



If Cessna had put all of their engines in the back of the plane, we'll all think that was normal and would wonder why those other funny people stick them on the front. 



Do Not Archive



Glenn



--

Eric M. Jones

Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 565
Location: Massachusetts

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 10:17 am Post subject: Re: Beech Starship

 	  Quote: 	
		  I don't think anyone will argue the physics of rear driven aircraft. There are some practical compromises like balance which you overcome with the praying nose wheel. That's not to say forward driven airplanes don't suffer compromises. They certainly do. This is largely about marketing to the masses and what the public is willing to accept. 	




...A propeller in undisturbed air, and an engine where cooling is easy is a recipe for good design. NO record-speed-holder airplane is rear driven. A propeller blade which has to cut through the aircrafts' wake makes for a noisy and inefficient prop.



The prop in the rear is style.

_________________
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net

wschertz(at)comcast.net
Guest

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 11:17 am Post subject: Beech Starship

I believe "Pushy Galore" set all kinds of climb records 

Bill Scherz 



---

nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 3:41 pm Post subject: Beech Starship

At 03:15 PM 5/16/2011, you wrote:



  	  Quote: 	
		  I believe "Pushy Galore" set all kinds of climb records 	


   and so did the P-180. To be sure, there are compromises

   in every final design decision. Getting one attractive

   feature is often at the expense of other features. But

   if the student is attentive to life's lessons, the next adventure

   will be more exciting than the past.



   A turbine powered Bonanza was seriously considered at

   one time. Project PD336. One was built and flown, I

   think a second one started. The last time I saw

   S/N 1 it was looking rather naked on a pallet of foam

   outside Burt's hangar in Mojave.

 [img]cid:.0[/img]



   I think he arranged some kind of trade for the carcass . . . I believe

   he wanted the engine, prop and instruments.



   The airplane was a real performer . . . with lousy range. But we

   learned some things and it didn't go into production. This was the

   program that validated the crowbar ov protection idea from the

   certified aircraft perspective. It would be years before the first

   ones flew in B&C's LR series regulators . . . 



   We learned a lot from the Starship too. After taking the write-off

   on the Starship, I'm told we made it all back as a supplier of

   custom composite parts. Nobody ever said useful education is

   inexpensive. Sometimes even the worst mistakes can be parlayed

   into useful follow-on ventures.



 

   Bob . . .

1ba9e5d2.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

223.89 KB

Viewed:

8755 Time(s)

Float Flyr

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 2704
Location: Campbellton, Newfoundland

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 6:10 pm Post subject: Beech Starship

The short answer is the viscosity of the fluid in which they operate is

different.  The aspect of the blades is also different and if you look

closely at the design of our board and isopod thrusters the prop is actually

well faired to the gearbox.  The shorter aspect ratio of water props allows

them to operate without experiencing the disruptive vortices a pusher prop

will always experience.



There are many other factors which can cause a prop to be noisy.  The shape

of the blade the speed of rotation and certainly the speed of the plane

itself.  If you want to hear a really noisy prop just try listening to

Russian counter turning props they used on Tu-95 (Bear) bombers.  Even

people in other planes can hear them coming!



I wonder if some sort of a duct for the blades on the star ship would

contain the sound.  Ducting the exhaust outside the prop arc would also

probably work.



Noel



 



--

_________________
Noel Loveys
Kitfox III-A
Aerocet 1100 Floats

Float Flyr

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 2704
Location: Campbellton, Newfoundland

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 6:27 pm Post subject: Beech Starship

I've flown in aircraft like the Lake LA-4 which has a tower mounted pusher

prop and a modified Volmer Jensen VJ-22 Sportsman with a 125 Hp Lycoming

tractor... also tower mounted.  Guess which one was louder.  That said I

agree the tractor config is more efficient.  



The advantage of the props on the star ship is it allow much more torque to

accelerate off short runways compared to straight turbines.  It's too bad

they didn't have the finances to work out the bugs.



This is not the first time this has  happened. The Tucker automobile was

another car among cars with more innovations than Lipton has teabags but you

will probably never even see one.



Noel



--

_________________
Noel Loveys
Kitfox III-A
Aerocet 1100 Floats

rickofudall

Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 1392
Location: Udall, KS, USA

Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 7:47 pm Post subject: Beech Starship

Way outside the topic, but I can't resist the temptation to tell this story.In the mid seventies I was working in the tooling machine shop at Cessna's Pawnee Plant and fell in with a bunch of street rodders. I got my heart set on a track roadster with a 26 or 27 T body and one day I spotted a body sitting in a warehouse just south of the Sante Fe tracks in Wellington, a little town about 25 miles south of Wichita. I pulled over and started poking around, looking for someone to ask about it when a fellow called to me from across the street. I told him what I wanted and we started talking about this and that and he invited me into his shop. As we passed from the customer waiting area of the body shop into the back, he asked me if I'd ever heard of a car called the Tucker. I said, yes, when I was a kid my grandparents used to take me to San Francisco and we always stopped at this little odd ball museum and curiosity shop called Sutros on the way to the beach and they had one. Well then he said, you'll appreciate this and opened the door. There were seven Tuckers sitting there along with three Cords. When I pulled my jaw back into position I found out the story. Seems these two brothers had established a niche for themselves restoring Cords and that led them into restoring Tuckers (the Tucker used the Cord's transmission). I only wish I had had a camera.

 



Rick Girard



On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Noel Loveys <noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca (noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca)> wrote:

[quote] --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca (noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca)>

 

 I've flown in aircraft like the Lake LA-4 which has a tower mounted pusher

 prop and a modified Volmer Jensen VJ-22 Sportsman with a 125 Hp Lycoming

 tractor... also tower mounted.  Guess which one was louder.  That said I

 agree the tractor config is more efficient.

 

 The advantage of the props on the star ship is it allow much more torque to

 accelerate off short runways compared to straight turbines.  It's too bad

 they didn't have the finances to work out the bugs.

 

 This is not the first time this has  happened. The Tucker automobile was

 another car among cars with more innovations than Lipton has teabags but you

 will probably never even see one.

 

 Noel

 

 --

_________________
The smallest miracle right in front of you is enough to make you happy....

mrspudandcompany(at)veriz
Guest

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 3:46 am Post subject: Beech Starship

one day I spotted a body sitting in a warehouse just south

of the Sante Fe tracks in Wellington, a little town about 25 miles south of

Wichita. I pulled over and started poking around

		So, Rick,



		Did you buy the body or did you totally forget your mission

upon viewing the Cord and Tuckers??



		Roger

		Do not archive

winmail.dat

Description:

Download

Filename:

winmail.dat

Filesize:

3.76 KB

Downloaded:

541 Time(s)

aerobubba(at)earthlink.ne
Guest

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 3:50 am Post subject: Beech Starship

I'm thinking that Bugatti up at OSH would have been pretty quick as well,

had the war not intervened.  However, forward mounted props yield better

ground clearance in nose high attitudes, aren't hit by detritus kicked up

by tires, and provide instant lift at low speed via prop wash across the

wing(s).  All are serious advantages to the light plane operator.  



Glen Matejcek

aerobubba(at)earthlink.net

BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 5:35 am Post subject: Beech Starship

Good Morning Noel,

  

 As far as an unusual sound from a pusher, how many listers had the pleasure  of hearing a B-36 pass over their heads on a takeoff? What a sound that  was!

  

 Happy Skies,

  

 Old Bob

  

 Do Not Archive

  

  In a message dated 5/16/2011 9:27:58 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca writes:

 [quote]-->    AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys"    <noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca>



I've flown in aircraft like the Lake LA-4    which has a tower mounted pusher

prop and a modified Volmer Jensen VJ-22    Sportsman with a 125 Hp Lycoming

tractor... also tower mounted.  Guess    which one was louder.  That said I

agree the tractor config is more    efficient.  



The advantage of the props on the star ship is it    allow much more torque to

accelerate off short runways compared to straight    turbines.  It's too bad

they didn't have the finances to work out the    bugs.



This is not the first time this has  happened. The Tucker    automobile was

another car among cars with more innovations than Lipton has    teabags but you

will probably never even see    one.



Noel



--

rickofudall

Joined: 19 Sep 2009
Posts: 1392
Location: Udall, KS, USA

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 6:29 am Post subject: Beech Starship

Roger, The shop owner directed me to the owner of the T body. The guy would talk your ear off all day long, but wouldn't sell. I found lots of Kansas farmers who did this back then. Leave old car parts out in a field just close enough to the road to be seen. Like dripping honey to attract ants. You got there life story and views on everything under the sun, but they wouldn't part with their bait.  One of the guys in the shop had a fiberglass 23 T body that I swapped for some Mustang parts. More work to get the leg room I needed but it worked out.

Rick



On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 6:39 AM, ROGER &  JEAN CURTIS <mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net (mrspudandcompany(at)verizon.net)> wrote:

  	  Quote: 	
		  

                 one day I spotted a body sitting in a warehouse just south

 of the Sante Fe tracks in Wellington, a little town about 25 miles south of

 Wichita. I pulled over and started poking around

 

 

 

                So, Rick,

 

                 Did you buy the body or did you totally forget your mission

 upon viewing the Cord and Tuckers??

 

                 Roger

 

 

                 Do not archive

 	


-- 

Zulu Delta

Mk IIIC

Thanks, Homer GBYM

It isn't necessary to have relatives in Kansas City in order to be unhappy.

   - Groucho Marx



 



  [quote][b]

_________________
The smallest miracle right in front of you is enough to make you happy....

N20DG

Joined: 02 Jan 2008
Posts: 61
Location: lancaster, texas

Posted: Tue May 17, 2011 7:07 am Post subject: Beech Starship

Yeah How about the XC-99 coming over your house at about 300 ft. Talk about  the shakes

 Dick

  

  In a message dated 5/17/2011 8:36:56 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  BobsV35B(at)aol.com writes:

 [quote]   Good Morning Noel,

    

   As far as an unusual sound from a pusher, how many listers had the    pleasure of hearing a B-36 pass over their heads on a takeoff? What a sound    that was!

    

   Happy Skies,

    

   Old Bob

    

   Do Not Archive

    

      In a message dated 5/16/2011 9:27:58 P.M. Central Daylight Time,    noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca writes:

   [quote]-->      AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys"      <noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca>



I've flown in aircraft like the Lake LA-4      which has a tower mounted pusher

prop and a modified Volmer Jensen VJ-22      Sportsman with a 125 Hp Lycoming

tractor... also tower mounted.       Guess which one was louder.  That said I

agree the tractor config is      more efficient.  



The advantage of the props on the star ship is      it allow much more torque to

accelerate off short runways compared to      straight turbines.  It's too bad

they didn't have the finances to      work out the bugs.



This is not the first time this has       happened. The Tucker automobile was

another car among cars with more      innovations than Lipton has teabags but you

will probably never even see      one.



Noel



--

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> AeroElectric-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum