MT 5 BLADE PROP

[SKYFLYER]

Ok Adam here it is....

http://www.mt-propeller.com/en/entw/stcs/twin_comm_1.htm

I wish there were more images available but appears to look pretty good regardless all the "improvements" kit will provide.
Must be a way to get a set that would fit yours.

http://www.mt-propeller.com/pdf/stcflyer/FL095US.pdf

[Adam Frisch]

Wow! Great news! That was quick certification! Shows you that if you want stuff done these days, do it in EASA-land then bi-lateral that stuff in. Much quicker than trying to do it via FAA.

I look forward to seeing these props on Commanders. Looks great!

[ghancock]

First the obvious, yes, it looks freaking awesome and manly.  However, I have a question:

I have a 310 with 2 bladed props.  My friend has the exact same airplane with 3 bladed props.  His airplane climbs a bit better than mine, but I out run him by about 10 knots in cruise.

So the question is:  It looks great, but what value do you get out of it besides that?  I heard the Turbine commanders have no trouble in a climb as it is, so wouldn't you be sacrificing some speed to through those 5 blades around?

Glenn

[SKYFLYER]

So the question is:  It looks great, but what value do you get out of it besides that?  I heard the Turbine commanders have no trouble in a climb as it is, so wouldn't you be sacrificing some speed to through those 5 blades around?

Glenn
[/quote]

Advantages
 Best vibration damping characteristics for almost vibration free propeller operations!
 Bonded on nickel alloy for best erosion protection of the blades!
 Reduced take-off distance by approx. 10 % (MTOW, SL, ISA conditions)!
 Enhanced cruise performance by 3 to 4 kts (MTOW, ISA)!
 Unlimited blade life; FOD repairable blades!
 Cooler ITTs during engine start up, therefore less engine wear and reduced risk of hot start!
 Unbeatable esthetic ramp appeal!
 Lighter than the original propellers by 8 kg (17,7 lbs) per propeller assembly!
 Significant inside and outside noise reduction!
 Cabin noise reduction more than 3 dB(A)!
 The STC complies with the strict German noise regulations 2010 - „Landeplatz
Lärmschutz Verordnung“ for unrestricted airport operations in Germany and other
 European Countries!

[donv]

The interesting question is not so much how it compares to the Dowtys on the Jetprops, but how it compares to the Hartzell wide chord props that many people have put on over the years.

The Hartzells promise slightly better performance, but I would think these would be quieter-- but that's just a guess.

The "unlimited blade life" is pretty much a dig at the Dowtys, where blade erosion is the key to whether or not the props can be overhauled.

[Adam Frisch]

It's always good to have more players in the field. Although Hartzell haven't been so bad here on the turbine side, they were diabolical on the piston side for my 520. 250hr AD unless you upgraded to never MV hub and then it was still no more than 500hrs SB unless you conveniently bought their new prop and hub set for $30K+...
And if you only serviced and didn't comply with SB, you had the find an non affiliated Hartzell prop shop, otherwise there was an internal memo that forbade them to service them without complying with the SB...

[SKYFLYER]

Try not to droooool on it tooooo much.

[SKYFLYER]

Can you say .... I have got to have these...

[donv]

Are they shorter than the Hartzells? It looks like you gain a bit of ground clearance.

[ghancock]

Skyflyer,

Yes, That is what I call marketing BS from the company that produced them.  Look at 3 blade props compared to the older 2 and you'll find the same thing.  The facts however are always between the two and usually a lot less colorful.

Glenn

[SKYFLYER]

Oh I agree 100% that most if not all marketing is BS to some extent regardless what the product or service is. However, if I am able to get even 5% reduction in take-off distance, than that is 5% added to safety and improved balanced field length. The cruise increase I am not so sure of, but climb performance should improve as well with the added thrust the props are putting out not that climb performance is lacking in any way, but better is most always a good thing.  The USAF converted the L-130 and LC-130's with 8 blade props and got almost a full 10% reduction in take-off roll and slow speed performance enhancements as well, just from the added thrust generated by the props. As for the noise level I suspect that as with the USAF and all other composite props they will be less noisy and pretty much vibration free making for a better ride.
Now, are these worth writing a check for just south of 100K... ummm for me absolutely as I think they look totally awesome on the Commander. And not withstanding I have my crayons at the ready to color in the "less colorful" facts between the three and five blades.

[donv]

Usually when they certify something like a prop, they don't actually recertify the takeoff performance. They just prove that it's no worse than stock. I wonder if that's what they did here, or if they actually recertified it?

[SKYFLYER]

I am not sure about that Don. The info I received from MT seems to indicate EASA recertified the performance data but I am pretty sure that the FAA on an STC does not. The Pilatus NG has a new 5 blade available from two manufactures and both (including MT) were recertified for the aircraft. A number of issues the metal four blade prop had are eliminated  (low rpm restrictions and others) and the performance factors were recertified with updates to the POH. But again I am not sure how the FAA approaches that when it involves EASA and the bi-lateral agreement. The hard test data over a six month proving program, ending last October, seems to genuinely indicate a good consistant 10% improvement on take off distance for the 690a test airframe at MTOW ISA and sea level. It is my understanding that there are two Commander aircraft (690D and 695A) operating in the EU that have the new props installed. It would be interesting to talk with either of them and see what the "real" world figures are even if it has only been a few weeks.

[Adam Frisch]

I think D-IHSI is the 695 that has it. I know it was going to participate in the certification.

[Adam Frisch]

Now, someone said that on the Merlins the MT STC is not valid for planes that have been converted to -10's. They either have to be -6's (in their case, which would be -5's in our case) or come with factory -10's. Anyone know if this is true here as well? Seems to be a big market they'd be losing then, all the 690A/B's with -10s...