KK>  >
KK> >   Thanks for the reply Kevin.  I have talked with most of the local
KK> >   pilots and they agree and disagree with you.  First, on larger 
ngines
KK> >   (over .90) they prefer a wooden prop.  BUT, almost all of them say
KK> >   that the newer plastic props are fine for the smaller engines and 
hey
KK> >   have not seen any kinds of hairline cracks in a long time..  One of
KK> >   the older pilots said they have improved them dramatically over the
KK> >   last two or three years...
KK> >
KK> >  Ken >
KK> >
KK> That's probably true and they will continue to improve.  Perhaps someday
KK>there will be a prop that will not bend or flex yet will disintegrate upon
KK>contact with flesh.  Of course then you'll have an over-reved engined, 
rop
KK>dust everywhere, and will this flesh thing include bugs?
  I read a very good article in the March 1996 issue of Model Airplane
  News.  It talks about props, how to balance, etc.  It mentioned about
  how the author saw a picture of a plane with a large circular-saw
  blade bolted to the propeller shaft.  That is a very clever way and
  highly effective statement on how dangerous propellers should be
  viewed.  The article does not gear more toward wooden or plastic just
  more geared toward proper balance, visibility and safety.
  Ken >
---
 þ SLMR 2.1a þ If she won't live forever, why give her a diamond?
---
---------------