Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: flyrotary
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 17:21:43 -0500
Message-ID: <redirect-2081507@logan.com>
X-Original-Return-Path: <13brv3@mchsi.com>
Received: from sccmmhc01.mchsi.com ([204.127.203.183] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1b1)
  with ESMTP id 2081407 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 20 Mar 2003 17:03:19 -0500
Received: from rad ([12.218.74.116]) by sccmmhc01.mchsi.com
          (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP
          id <20030320220318.VLSB22382.sccmmhc01.mchsi.com@rad>
          for <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>;
          Thu, 20 Mar 2003 22:03:18 +0000
Reply-To: <13brv3@mchsi.com>
From: <13brv3@mchsi.com>
X-Original-To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Oil cooler in the radiator?
X-Original-Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 16:03:05 -0600
X-Original-Message-ID: <000101c2ef2c$7f66d3c0$0201a8c0@rad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <list-2080798@logan.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106


But the issue that ended my studies of the oil/water approach is that the
available exchangers (Fluidyne, Setrab, others) had large pressure drops at
the flows we need in the rotary; at least for the 20B in my case.  

Al
-------------------

Thanks for giving me yet another parameter to be concerned about :-)  I'll
try to factor this into the thought process.

Rusty