X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from ms-smtp-03.southeast.rr.com ([24.25.9.102] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.10) with ESMTP id 2180923 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:17:15 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.102; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 (cpe-024-074-103-061.carolina.res.rr.com [24.74.103.61]) by ms-smtp-03.southeast.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id l6GIGBFW004636 for ; Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:16:11 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <000b01c7c7d5$7454e270$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Contrasting view point was [FlyRotary] Re: AirVenture Souviner Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:16:39 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01C7C7B3.ECF94120" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C7C7B3.ECF94120 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Now, that is a nice idea, Mark. Showing a preference without poking a = stick in eye (Hey! we only have two if we put our heads together ) the = other folks {:>) Ed ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Mark Steitle=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 2:09 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Contrasting view point was [FlyRotary] Re: = AirVenture Souviner We could always wear the hat with the "I love flying my rotary" button = stuck over the piston. ;-) Also, if you bought a RWS T-shirt, you could wear the hat, but = emphasize your preferance to the rotary by the message on the shirt. =20 Mark=20 (should be eligible for a pin very soon) =20 On 7/16/07, Ed Anderson wrote:=20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Ehkerr@aol.com=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 12:20 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Contrasting view point was [FlyRotary] = Re: AirVenture Souviner =20 In a message dated 7/16/2007 11:21:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time, = eanderson@carolina.rr.com writes:=20 Hummm, while I am a cast-in-stone rotary type, I really don't = see any point in throwing stones at those alternate engine types who = prefer pistons. Many smaller airframes simply couldn't use a rotary = even if they wanted to.=20 My view is that us "Alternative Engine" types all face the same = "hostile" outside world and need to stick together. Certainly we can = (and will) debate the relative merits of each choice, but I certainly = feel that somebody that successfully puts a covair,Subaru, V-6, etc, in = an project and safely gets airborne is a kindred soul.=20 Now, if the logo has something like an "X" across a symbol for = a certified, expensive and all to prone to cost $$, aircraft engine, - = that - I might could sign on for {:>). But, since I won't be going to = Oshkosh, I guess I don't have to be concerned about it. =20 Just my viewpoint on the topic FWIW Ed Hi Ed, et al, As aviators I agree we are kindred souls. But, believing as I do = that the rotary engine is so far superior to piston engines I could not = endorse a message that promotes both pistons and rotaries. I understand = Pat only wishes to promote automotive conversions but, for some rotary = enthusiasts, the hat design can be an uncomfortable compromise.=20 Ernie Ernie, While I certainly agree (surprise!) with your opinion about = rotary engines having some unbeatable qualities and characteristics, = there is unfortunately not a series of rotary engines that meets every = need. I personally believe that for some applications, the smaller = Corvair and Subaru engines (for example) are about the best viable = alternative engines at the moment. But, that said, it is certainly up = to each individual to show their "passion" as they see fit. The next = thing we will likely see are hats with an "X" across a rotary - I just = personally do not see what either approach will do for the alternate = engine community. =20 Again, just my personal viewpoint and to each their own {:>) Ed =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= - Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL.com. ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C7C7B3.ECF94120 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 Now, that is a nice idea, = Mark.   Showing=20 a preference without poking a stick in eye (Hey! we only=20 have two if we put our heads together )   the other folks = {:>)
 
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Mark = Steitle=20
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 = 2:09 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Contrasting view=20 point was [FlyRotary] Re: AirVenture Souviner

We could always wear the hat with the "I love flying my rotary" = button=20 stuck over the piston.  ;-)
 
Also, if you bought a RWS T-shirt, you could wear the hat, but = emphasize=20 your preferance to the rotary by the message on the shirt.  =
 
Mark
(should be eligible for a pin very soon)

 
On 7/16/07, Ed=20 Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com&g= t;=20 wrote:=20
 
----- Original Message ----- =
From: = Ehkerr@aol.com =
To: Rotary = motors in=20 aircraft
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 = 12:20=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Contrasting=20 view point was [FlyRotary] Re: AirVenture Souviner

 
In a message dated 7/16/2007 11:21:25 AM Eastern Daylight = Time, eanderson@carolina.rr.com writes:
Hummm, while I am a = cast-in-stone rotary=20 type, I really don't see any point in throwing stones at=20 those alternate engine types who prefer pistons.  = Many=20 smaller airframes simply couldn't use a rotary even if they = wanted to.=20
 
My  view is that us = "Alternative=20 Engine" types all face the same "hostile" outside world and need = to=20 stick together.  Certainly we can (and will) debate the = relative=20 merits of each choice, but I certainly feel that somebody that=20 successfully puts a covair,Subaru, V-6, etc,  in an project = and=20 safely gets airborne is a kindred soul.
 
Now, if the logo has something = like an=20 "X"   across a symbol for a certified, expensive and = all to=20 prone to cost $$, aircraft engine, - that - I might could = sign on=20 for {:>).  But, since I won't be going to Oshkosh, I = guess I=20 don't have to be concerned about it. 
 
Just my viewpoint on the topic=20 FWIW
 
Ed
Hi Ed, et al,
As aviators I agree we are kindred souls. But, = believing=20 as I do that the rotary engine is so far superior to piston = engines I=20 could not endorse a message that promotes = both pistons and=20 rotaries. I understand Pat only wishes to promote = automotive=20 conversions but, for some rotary enthusiasts, the hat design can = be an=20 uncomfortable compromise.
Ernie


Ernie, While I certainly agree = (surprise!) with=20 your opinion about rotary engines having some unbeatable qualities = and=20 characteristics, there is unfortunately not a series of rotary = engines=20 that meets every need.   I personally believe that for = some=20 applications, the smaller Corvair and Subaru engines (for example) =  are about the best  viable alternative engines at = the=20 moment.  But, that said, it is certainly up to each = individual to=20 show their "passion" as they see fit.  The next thing we will = likely=20 see are hats with an "X" across a rotary - I just personally do = not see=20 what either approach will do for the alternate engine = community. =20
 
Again, just my personal viewpoint and to each = their own=20 {:>)
 
 
Ed

 

Get a sneak peak of the all-new AOL.com.
=
------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C7C7B3.ECF94120--