Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums

Contra rotating Propellers

Technical Discuss Contra rotating Propellers in the World War II - Aviation forums; When I first noticed these on aircraft like the later Seafires I didn't think thats what they were, I ...


Go Back   Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums > World War II - Aviation > Technical

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-21-2007, 11:24 AM   #1
Member
 
Seawitch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London
Posts: 91
Country:
Contra rotating Propellers

When I first noticed these on aircraft like the later Seafires I didn't think thats what they were, I rather thought that it was a way of mounting that many blades without weakening the mount/shaft.
Now i know different and wonder was this very complicated to do, why do it?
Did this produce more power? Neutralise Torque?
Over to the experts!
__________________
..
Probably the Worlds best Aircraft

Seawitchartist.com
Seawitch is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 03:01 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
mkloby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Jacksonville, NC
Posts: 3,224
Country:
I would imagine that it would produce more thrust than a single prop. However, it will add more weight, and no doubt complicate design and maintenance. It should also serve to aid in offseting torque-effect, p-factor, and gyro precession.
__________________
If the Army and the Navy ever look on heaven's scenes, they will find the streets are guarded by United States Marines
mkloby is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 04:31 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
ToughOmbre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 2,112
Country:
Technical question...

Contra rotating...that the same as counter rotating? I've seen the terms used inter-changeably. When talking about the P-38 I say counter.
__________________


“Let's get Enterprise and Hornet turned into the wind."
ToughOmbre is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 04:41 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
k9kiwi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Kiwi Land
Posts: 848
Country:
Contra rotating is what the US Government did around a South American guerilla force.

They are interchangeable expressions, however the correct usage is Contra Rotating.
__________________
4 out of 5 voices in my head say I am normal. Majority rules.
You're just jealous because the voices only talk to me.
k9kiwi is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2007, 04:44 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,448
Country:
Certainly reduced torque. Many of the powerful single prop Schneider Trophy racers had great difficulty taking off due to engine torque. The Macchi-Castoldi MC.72 solved its torque problem with the counter-rotating propeller.
Graeme is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2007, 07:12 AM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 41
They are not interchangeable terms!!! Contrarotating means a propeller that has two props rotating in different directions on the same axis while counterrotating described two separate props like the P-38 case.

Their primary benefit is elimination of asymmetric torque. Read the Sptfire 21 handling reports with both prop types. The contrarotating prop made flight possible without even touching the rudder.

Had the F4U been fitted with one, accident rates would have plummeted.
pasoleati is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2007, 10:35 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,448
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by pasoleati View Post
while counterrotating described two separate props like the P-38 case.
Maybe..But not according to Derek James-The Schneider Trophy Aircraft.

Graeme is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2007, 11:01 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 12
Country:
Mr James misspoke, pasoleati did not.
130fe is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2007, 02:15 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,448
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 130fe View Post
Mr James misspoke,
Disappointing, coming from the 'esteemed' Putnam range. Oddly, he corrects himself in the captioning.

Graeme is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2007, 05:10 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 41
The topic was discussed in Torque Meter, the journal of Aircraft Engine Historical Society and indeed the terms are defined as I previously wrote.
pasoleati is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2007, 01:36 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 966
Country:
Hi Pasoleati,

>The topic was discussed in Torque Meter, the journal of Aircraft Engine Historical Society and indeed the terms are defined as I previously wrote.

Years ago, I read in the context of a Fairey Gannet discussion that "contra-rotating" not only included co-axial propellers, but actually one common drive train for both.

I'm not sure about the Macchi, but it might be that each of the two coupled engines has its own independend drive train. If we follow the above definition, it would have to be called "counter" rather than "contra rotating".

(From an linguistic point of view, I disapprove of the attempt to make a distinction by using two different variants of a synonym. We don't have a thread "The Greatest Etymological Blunders of WW2", but if we had, I'd nominate this one

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)
HoHun is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2007, 02:03 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
SoD Stitch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pine Mountain Lake, California
Posts: 752
Country:
My understanding as to the main reason for contra-rotating props is that they are more efficient; the self-cancelling torque feature of contra-rotating props is a side-benefit, not the main benefit. Contra-rotating props eliminate the rotational airflow around the airframe which causes energy loss, making the propellers more efficient.

Quote:

"When airspeed is low the mass of the air flowing through the propeller disk (thrust) causes a significant amount of tangential or rotational air flow to be created by the spinning blades. The energy of this tangential air flow is wasted in a single propeller design. To use this wasted effort the placement of a second propeller behind the first takes advantage of the disturbed airflow.

If it is well designed, a contra-rotating propeller will have no rotational air flow, pushing a maximum amount of air uniformly through the propeller disk, resulting in high performance and low induced energy loss. It also serves to counter the asymmetrical torque effect of a conventional propeller. Some contra-rotating systems were designed to be used at take off for maximum power and efficiency, and allowing one of the propellers to be disabled during cruise to extend flight time.

The efficiency of a contra-rotating prop is somewhat offset by its mechanical complexity. Nonetheless, coaxial contra-rotating propellers and rotors are moderately common in military aircraft and naval applications, such as torpedoes, where the added maintenance is not a concern to government budgets."

From: contra-rotating propellers: Information from Answers.com

Last edited by SoD Stitch : 08-06-2007 at 03:59 PM. Reason: Spelling
SoD Stitch is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2007, 03:07 PM   #13
Older Than Dirt
 
ccheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Posts: 5,049
Country:
Lemme see..... If I were sitting in a P-38, the left prop spinning counter-
clockwise and the right prop spinning clockwise, I would be witnessing
counter-rotating props. Now.... the Seafire (and there was a Reno
racing P-51 so configured) has two props on two shafts (one within the
other) turning in opposite directions. Aha .....Contra-rotating.....

And of course, you have the Dornier 335.....push-pull.

Don't you just love it when a plan comes together ??

Charles
__________________


I can only please one person per day.

Today is not your day.

Tomorrow doesn't look good either....
ccheese is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2007, 08:44 PM   #14
IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
 
FLYBOYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,227
Country:
And with the P-38s propeller rotation, this eliminated a "critical engine."

Wikipedia did good on this one...

Critical engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
__________________
"IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT"
FLYBOYJ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-06-2007, 09:42 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,448
Country:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoHun View Post
(From an linguistic point of view, I disapprove of the attempt to make a distinction by using two different variants of a synonym. We don't have a thread "The Greatest Etymological Blunders of WW2", but if we had, I'd nominate this one
Regards,

Henning (HoHun)
Very true!

And you're right about the Macchi. A unique engine installation that has 'fused' the definitions.


Last edited by Graeme : 08-07-2007 at 01:13 AM. Reason: Macchi magic
Graeme is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.1.0
   

AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92