X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imo-m27.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.8] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with ESMTP id 2603545 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:29:58 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.137.8; envelope-from=WRJJRS@aol.com Received: from WRJJRS@aol.com by imo-m27.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.3.) id q.d15.183e4021 (37122) for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:29:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from FWM-M28 (fwm-m28.webmail.aol.com [64.12.193.230]) by cia-ma01.mx.aol.com (v121.4) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMA018-91024767e7419b; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:29:05 -0500 References: To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Supercharging Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:29:05 -0500 X-AOL-IP: 65.161.241.3 In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: wrjjrs@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CA0FA1DBF483A6_13FC_58E5_FWM-M28.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 33161-STANDARD Received: from 65.161.241.3 by FWM-M28.sysops.aol.com (64.12.193.230) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:29:05 -0500 Message-Id: <8CA0FA1DBF483A6-13FC-2BB1@FWM-M28.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag: NO ----------MB_8CA0FA1DBF483A6_13FC_58E5_FWM-M28.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Greg, Superchargers are sometimes simpler to implement, but there are other reasons they aren't as popular on aircraft. First they are a power robbing device. There is a net gain in power of course, but the charger can require 10-15 HP to drive it at WOT and it makes the engine less efficient. The other problem is you must be sure the unit is up to continous use in the boost?RPM range. Lastly the mount must be solid enough to hold up to continous use as well. Bill Jepson? -----Original Message----- From: Greg Ward To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:32 pm Subject: [FlyRotary] Supercharging As I have cruised around, looking at options, I came across www.camdensuperchargers.com, who make kits for rotaries.? Has anybody had any experience with this?? I like the idea of less heat, and plumbing, but how about endurance?? I know John Slade had a lot of fun until he got the right Turbo, I wonder if the situation would be any different with this. Greg Ward (trying to get into the air) ________________________________________________________________________ More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail ! - http://webmail.aol.com ----------MB_8CA0FA1DBF483A6_13FC_58E5_FWM-M28.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Greg,
Superchargers are sometimes simpler to implement, but there are other reasons they aren't as popular on aircraft. First they are a power robbing device. There is a net gain in power of course, but the charger can require 10-15 HP to drive it at WOT and it makes the engine less efficient. The other problem is you must be sure the unit is up to continous use in the boost RPM range. Lastly the mount must be solid enough to hold up to continous use as well.
Bill Jepson 


-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Ward <gregw@onestopdesign.biz>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:32 pm
Subject: [FlyRotary] Supercharging

As I have cruised around, looking at options, I came across www.camdensuperchargers.com, who make kits for rotaries.  Has anybody had any experience with this?  I like the idea of less heat, and plumbing, but how about endurance?  I know John Slade had a lot of fun until he got the right Turbo, I wonder if the situation would be any different with this.
Greg Ward
(trying to get into the air)

More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail!
----------MB_8CA0FA1DBF483A6_13FC_58E5_FWM-M28.sysops.aol.com--