Twin Tri-Pacer custom side-by-side double engined Tri-Pacer - photo

Twin Tri-Pacer custom side-by-side double engined Tri-Pacer. Largest image size available.

https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/h...n_tripacer.jpg

Quote:

---

Also known as the Wagner Twin 2, Wagner Twin Tri-Pacer, and Wagner Pacer 125, this was a standard PA-22 fitted with two 125 hp Lycoming O-290-D engines mounted side-by-side. The conversion was produced in three weeks by Harold Wagner from Portland, Oregon. To clear the two overlapping propellers the left engine shaft was fitted with a 4.75 in (121 mm) extension. After 100 hours testing, the aircraft was converted back to its original configuration.

---

Previously:

https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...2518#post96512
https://www.homemadetools.net/forum/...790#post133254

Those props obviously have to be counter-rotating... I wonder what they used to keep them in sync. (chain, belt or direct gear drive?). It sure doesn't appear like there's much clearance between the tip of the propeller and the adjacent hub.

Edit: If I would have paid attention, I'd have noticed the pitch of the propellers were identical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IAMSatisfied

Those props obviously have to be counter-rotating... I wonder what they used to keep them in sync. (chain, belt or direct gear drive?). It sure doesn't appear like there's much clearance between the tip of the propeller and the adjacent hub.

---

https://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contr...David/8788.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baja

https://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contr...David/8788.htm

---

Thank you for that... I didn't even consider the possibility of adding an extension to one prop shaft... it certainly does the job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IAMSatisfied

Those props obviously have to be counter-rotating... I wonder what they used to keep them in sync. (chain, belt or direct gear drive?). It sure doesn't appear like there's much clearance between the tip of the propeller and the adjacent hub.

Edit: If I would have paid attention, I'd have noticed the pitch of the propellers were identical.

---

I would assume the two Lycomings are identical, as are the props. Not counter rotating. No need for any mechanical synching. Spacer puts props on separate planes. RPM synch is as in any simple twin; two hand throttles and pilot´s ears to minimize beats.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baja

https://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contr...David/8788.htm

---

We would assume the two Lycomings to be identical, same for props. So not counter rotating. And no need for any mechanical synching. Spacer puts props on separate planes. RPM sync is as in any simple twin - two hand throttles and pilot´s ears minimize any beats.

What a weird looking hack for a Tri-pacer. Surprised it had enough wing – and heavy enough airframe – to support it, let alone the increase in stall speed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scotsman Hosie

What a weird looking hack for a Tri-pacer. Surprised it had enough wing – and heavy enough airframe – to support it, let alone the increase in stall speed.

---

Good points. Not clear whether the 100h testing included flight type(s), and with what results. Several other types Here:

TwinNavion.com