Ernest, No that isn't true. I agree that any supercharging method certainly adds complication. The MAJOR difference is that a SUPERcharger, rather than a turbo requires additional careful engineering to enable the DRIVE for the blower to survive. A turbo must be mounted itself, but the drive is simple, even if the plumbing isn't.

Cheers,

Bill


-----Original Message-----
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 8:31 am
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Supercharging

wrjjrs@aol.com wrote: 
> 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 Doesn't the same apply to all intake charging devices? 
 
-- 
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ 
Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html