Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: flyrotary
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 19:03:43 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1830872@logan.com>
From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: EWP water pump
In-Reply-To: <002101c275df$4967ee60$1702a8c0@WorkGroup>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Posted for "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>:
Hi Leon,

      Didn't mean for my technical musings to get your perturbed before you
leave of your holiday.  Apparently, my technical analysis did not convey
what I intended - which was why I now believe the EWP might be suitable for
aircraft use. I don't pretend to be a thermodynamic expert and  only used
the data presented by the Davies  Website to infer that (based on that data)
it would appear the power used in driving a mechanical pump at high rpms is
mostly wasted energy.  Still some questions but willing to await the outcome
of Todd's experiment.

      While I don't think this list is likely to become like the "other" list,
I also do not think we are committed to forgo technical discussions on any
topic.  Some views will undoubtedly be incorrect and merit changing and
others will be on the money - to the benefit of us all.  I am as eager as
anyone to see new advances in our adaptation of the rotary to aircraft use,
on the other hand - I will admit to perhaps being overly cautious to same -
given some of the potential downside if they fail to deliver up to snuff.

     That said, I applaud Todd for stepping forward to as you say "Determine
if it ACTUALLY works for aircraft use" and your "prodding" of some of us to
look past our current perceptions or misconceptions.  So have a great
holiday, get your battery recharged, and see you on the list when you
return.

Best Regards

Ed Anderson


> This newsletter is beginning to sound like that "Other One"! Mostly
> theoretical prognostications and very little actual experiment.