Not really...the physics of a prop are very well understood.
The form of the screw propeller hasn’t really changed is almost 200 years...people laugh and make fun of the Sharrow prop? Why is that? Focusing on form instead of physics?
When combining modern modeling software and manufacturing processes, the sky is the limit. Limited only by the cost to bring the product to market.
If we can cast and balance a titanium alloy fan assembly for jet turbine turning 20,000 rpm, a stainless or aluminum prop is a piece of cake.
I would maybe argue that of an apples and oranges comparison.
with a boat prop, there are more variables than in any other thing like it.
displacement, planing, fast planing, surfacing, hull types differing in increments of lift and resulting reduced load on the prop screwing through the water.
many will tell you that a guide is a 200 rpm gain or loss either way with each 1 inch increments of pitch. That’s not far off in general terms. But the wide ability of props these days can throw all sorts in the mix. Add prop slip of different set ups and your off track again. Add in another blade or a wider diameter too. Jeez your away on another tangent. Go from an ally 4 blade of a certain diameter and pitch to a 3 blade performance X7 alloy of the same and your guessing at it. Get a stepped hull with a flat running pad that wasn’t utilised with an ally prop, but is suddenly into play with a lifting raked prop and reducing load on the prop, allowing the rpm to climb through the roof. Lots to think about.
jet airplane engine is a fan working through a known density of small and known margins at different altitudes. I’d say it’s an easier thing to predict, if it’s even comparable at all. Different thing in my opinion.
