Very precise measurement of fuel consumption - paramotor experiment.

[@jonathanjaffe8897]

I've been an inventor & product development engineer for over 40 years, and rarely have I seen such wonderful progress and success with an initial proof of concept model. While "the devil is in the details" as far as getting into serial production, "the light at the end of the tunnel" also appears VERY bright on this one. Additionally, it appears that it could relatively easily be modified into variants to fit additional motors, after the main market of Vittorazi 185s has been taken care of. MEGA-CONGRATS to Miroslav and his team on this!!!

[@lawman7806]

Great test results. Can't wait to see the final run production.

[@JohnUllrey]

It's really cool to be 'brought along for the ride' to watch real innovations being made in paramotoring. Thank you.

[@slawekwnuk2137]

Are you a paraglider and have you tested this propeller? Are you just talking without knowing anything?

[@IvanMilocco]

You are doing a really Great job for this sport. You are literally changing this world!

[@tehJok3r001]

Awesome innovation - saving for a scout 4Sure ....

[@vauxscott]

Congratulations on your success! I am sure there are many who will have their own opinion on how to do it better, but you have actually built, tested and proven your concept, so you win. I really appreciate your foresight, skill and methodical approach to innovation in an otherwise stagnant PPG copycat world, you and your team should feel rightfully proud, the rest have some catching up to do. Oh, and thanks for taking the time to make these videos, and taking us on your journey!

[@WebberAerialImaging]

Stoked for the release of this prop!

[@SwissAdventureRider]

So proud of you guys! Can’t wait to test it! Cheers

[@michroz]

Please, consider the _whole line_ of propellers suitable for all other paramotors too! Please! I'll buy one for sure!

[@johncpescod]

The fuel savings are certainly great, and this has several advantages. Either less take-off weight for a certain distance to travel. Travel further/longer airtime with the same take-off fuel weight or combinations of both. But for me it seems that less noise is really one of the best features as the noise issue is what is often making our sport intolerable for those non-flyers on the ground. My paramotor dream is silent (hardly discernable on the ground) powered flight - like paragliding. Then many critical people will have nothing more to complain about.

[@Para_Ninja]

Im not a Scout guy and I am super excited to get one of these props :) great work!

[@MrWickwire27]

I don't know how I missed this video when it came out, but wow are those some impressive results. Would the pitch have to slightly be modified to work properly on a 2.87 reduction for the Factory R? I hope to see this prop in the field in the near future.

[@brunodesousa3772]

I cannot wait to buy one! 👌🏼

[@Hyperious_in_the_air]

You going to bring this to Iceland this year? I'm going to the 3rd expedition and would love to see it in person

[@mamatuja]

Any progress on this idea since you released this video?

[@PDWhite]

Looking good 🤞works well and can be made for a good price.

[@huepix]

Will you be able to adapt to a three blade prop?

[@pimplequeen2]

Splendid!

[@believeinrakesh846]

I always Admire you buddy. 👍 love from india

[@aussieparamotorman9931]

That’s awesome!

[@Faber850]

Its really nice work. now can you enginer it with a 3 or 4 blade propeller aswell?

[@paulslevinsky580]

That fills a huge hole. I've got an alternate application for that prop NOW. I can see sub 70's and part 103's adopting it too.

[@tango_sierra8608]

Awesome video

[@mamatuja]

Good luck with your success. What is the pitch range on this propeller?( Distance per rotation ) Thanks

[@aaronhorn6849]

Thats awesome!

[@Chris-Fennimore]

Very cool 👍😎👍

[@m.h.7561]

Can i buy it here in Germany? Is it even suitable for my FreshBreeze Top80 motor? Thank you!

[@lutherblisset3422]

What about wireless throttle?

[@colin5785]

We are waiting

[@huffpappy]

This is awesome. Do you think the results will be similar with different belt reduction ratios? I use a 1/2.87 with a 140 mm prop currently.

[@SCOUTaviation]

i definitely want to test on my Factory R with 2.87 reduction ratio Yes, I assume it will be very similar

[@huffpappy]

Thanks. I'll stand by for your results....this is very cool.

[@claytong7]

let’s go!!!

[@bobhoggarth9315]

When can I buy one???

[@mmcowan]

Need me this prop!

[@guyintci]

i want one! that with efi on the 185......

[@TONYPARAMOTOR]

hi. congratulations to everyone who helped develope the new prop. we all want knowledge to push forward with new tech. WELL DONE EVERYONE... I wish you all my best. stay well and safe. thumbs up ;0)

[@SCOUTaviation]

Yes you are right. This was team work. As everything is.

[@justbikewatch]

That will be a huge win for electric paramotor, most of the people fly around +-1h.. if a variable pitch could increase the air time by over 30% we are thinking on making the electric suffice most of the flights...

[@christopheralbright6288]

We need to run this on my fuel injected NXT. 50% more efficient at cruise then stock????

[@Adrenalinspunk]

I'm guessing air density will have a lotv to play in this as well

[@SCOUTaviation]

Both flights done on within one hour at same altitude. So the only thing different was the prop.

[@manofsan]

@@SCOUTaviation - can you do a different test, where you test different take off roll distances on a trike, using both regular & variomatic propellers? Would that be possible?

[@Joe-zw9ep]

Why use aerodynamic adjustment rather than (centrifugal/centripetal)? Surely the aerodynamic adjustment will change with altitude? Thanks!

[@SCOUTaviation]

Centrifugal needs weights. Why weight to something we want to keep light?

[@Joe-zw9ep]

@@SCOUTaviation Maybe I did not pay attention to the first video? I thought you could attain the optimum adjustment at the right RPM just through the momentum of the assembly itself? High RPM - more force Low RPM - less force If you need to add weights to get that result just with spinning I totally see why you'd opt for the aero solution. Out of interest do you have any figures (was any CFD done?) for what savings (if any) such a system would have? Thanks! :)

[@mamatuja]

Hey Miro. Theoretically when you have a "13ﾟ" propeller (setting) you would have the same fuel consumption as if you had a " 13ﾟ" fixed propeller (setting). Technically what you changed is the take off pitch or cceleration pitch. Your sales "pitch" should be easier take off not fuel consumption.🤔🤙

[@SCOUTaviation]

Not at all. With 13 degrees the engine was crazy overheating at full throttle. This was explained in the previous video.

[@mamatuja]

@@SCOUTaviation My point was that propellers are normally made for cruising speeds. Propeller pitch adjustment is mainly for takeoffs. If you saved 30% of fuel compared to the other propeller that means the other propeller was not correct for cruising.

[@nameberry220]

@@mamatuja you need to watch the video again. kzbin.info/www/bejne/lYSXZpyfjbNljq8

[@danielroush8190]

Hopefully the price will be reasonable to allow the majority of us to afford

[@mikebrady2073]

Considering my fuel cost just increased 28% in these last 2 weeks because of @#&§ , Scout’s new adjustable prop is a winner.

[@Resteasy8686]

What about the fact you didn't lock your throttle to maintain the same rpm's for both tests. This could throw off the results.

[@SCOUTaviation]

I don't have cruise control on my paramotor. But I did a pretty good job holding same RPM and same altitude all time. I consider the test accurate enough.

[@SkyFlyerZayne]

33!

[@GuardianServiceDogs]

Now to tackle mass production 😉

[@michaelcordero1111]

33% huh? Dual 33's in the description huh? Does anybody else understand this? 😉

[@Odan6969]

This prop won't come out fast enough. lol

[@mamatuja]

Good luck with your success. What is the pitch range on this propeller?( Distance per rotation ) Thanks