X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from nm22.access.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com ([98.139.44.149] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4c3j) with SMTP id 5003465 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 04 Jun 2011 12:25:21 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=98.139.44.149; envelope-from=keltro@att.net Received: from [98.139.44.100] by nm22.access.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jun 2011 16:24:45 -0000 Received: from [98.139.44.78] by tm5.access.bullet.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jun 2011 16:24:45 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1015.access.mail.sp2.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 04 Jun 2011 16:24:45 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 640710.77246.bm@omp1015.access.mail.sp2.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 54892 invoked by uid 60001); 4 Jun 2011 16:24:45 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=att.net; s=s1024; t=1307204685; bh=Q5e2Ixesa1D8knzewpZtWYWeW0yBXcbtzNPxklz1xtU=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=kuBSq9uECZJPiRbaArDjKPP5y6dwpGt9cv6XqQFTAnjEsjuKEQwlvh+klX0C6RVPVW03G1qjSRxoN9C0pvoghCHhp/Ifmh5jRSnI7169k36iRAXbmueS3mU5CEUmsH2HR+p55SsLmKprXdoBPnB3jw8AsmydfWNrpzu+R5Pws3w= DomainKey-Signature:a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=att.net; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=YjPSruCRwSkU8CcucviPiorpGC+ozzwCapPpOv7WsS/B/pXqUk0Jbyz6dxBCuOSXB1AbUYn21uB1x33euVrHikrQq381hFKwN4zHUAit3zVGceY8IjXKNNcHFlY/SDkWnMuFRJWWzNxUW2bnXx3HfFCQBKMO8kDM2zvdQFETzok=; Message-ID: <470098.22879.qm@web83903.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: N7SD.e0VM1mB2kc.KEroZTF1fOU1K_basGzGg6qsPz7SGhG mAuskXtsEQbU8Z.k.u3oRHxCnIFiV6rIvkU0KXf0iX1pAT1Q7h93wmTMCtZl XVPZvH2HFBrzuPN5y1jaWRwTS0qo2hxdxbrv6fOsgHzCn5lRyfKXMuStU3j. MDw2gqs4ATWAg8QY8DRyieBjzP79XkFqnYP.w1nyVJjceSriXl8ynRwZokEg RqAMJwyVg8UXZvvxgDDzSxgerz7caIp_zyiu9WrfYbs96_Q4ZLnBYQKjVFWF heTR5dlPjbzCaLUMMmdASTOYATESrDHtOrL7oqyBPFSD6KCQ_vYJ0T9cmUm4 7jam0ausFGHVdkQAo Received: from [208.114.42.210] by web83903.mail.sp1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 04 Jun 2011 09:24:45 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/570 YahooMailWebService/0.8.111.303096 References: Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2011 09:24:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Kelly Troyer Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Fwd: [LML] Re: L-IV Choice of Engine To: Rotary motors in aircraft In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1609058510-1307204685=:22879" --0-1609058510-1307204685=:22879 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mark,=0A=A0=A0 Again "Well Said" !!.........................<:)=0A=A0=0AKel= ly Troyer=0A"DYKE DELTA JD2" (Eventually)=0A"13B ROTARY"_ Engine=0A"RWS"_RD= 1C/EC2/EM2=0A"MISTRAL"_Backplate/Oil Manifold=0A"TURBONETICS"_TO4E50 Turbo= =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: Mark Steitle =0ATo: Rotary motors in aircraft =0ASent: Sat, June 4, 2011 10:54:54 AM=0ASubject: [FlyRotary] Fwd: [LML] R= e: L-IV Choice of Engine=0A=0AGuys,=A0 =0A=0AHere's the latest posting on t= he Lancair list relating to alternative (rotary) =0Aengines. =A0It will lik= ely be my last posting as I feel that my time would be =0Abetter spent talk= ing to my dog.=0A=0A=0AMark=A0=0A=0A=0A---------- Forwarded message -------= ---=0AFrom: Mark Steitle =0ADate: Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 1= 0:51 AM=0ASubject: Re: [LML] Re: L-IV Choice of Engine=0ATo: Lancair Mailin= g List =0A=0A=0AHi Gary,=A0 =0A=0ASince I have actua= lly completed a successful rotary installation, I would like =0Ato comment = on the rotary engine option. =A0=0A=0AFirst, addressing the negatives,=A0= =0A=0A1) =A0Apex seals - The apex seal issue has been solved long ago and i= s no longer =0Aan issue, unless the engine is over-boosted and allowed to d= etonate; if this is =0Aa concern, do what the boosted guys do and go with t= he=A0oversized 3mm apex seals. =0A=A0Even if the apex seal issue was still = an issue, losing an apex seal is =0Aequivalent to burning an exhaust valve.= =A0The engine will still run, just be down =0Aon power.=A0=0A=0A2) Insuran= ce - =A0Obtaining full-coverage insurance has not been an issue for my =0AE= S,=A0=0A=0A3) Complex Systems - Not sure what you're referring with complex= systems =0A(running EFI which also handles ignition); =A0Yes, I'm running = 6 coils, but that =0Aprovides redundancy, also running dual alternators/bat= teries (Z-14 design) same =0Aas many others. =A0=0A=0A=A04) =A0weight is vi= rtually the same as IO-540 (to the best of my recollection, my =0AES weighe= d in at =A02080#),=0A=0A5) Cooling drag - I will concede this one, but this= can be minimized with =0Acareful cooling design and the use of cowl flaps.= =A0The P-51, and others, were =0Aliquid cooled. =A0As I recall, the Voyage= r was liquid cooled and it made it around =0Athe globe non-stop. =A0 =A0=0A= =0A5) Rotary engine's exhaust is loud - Agree, but this can be handled with= a =0Aturbo, a good muffler, sound insulation, and/or an ANR headset.=0A=0A= =0AAs for the rotary's positives:=0A=0A1) =A0The rotary is the epitome of t= he KISS principle. =A0The 20B (3-rotor) rotary =0Aengine has only 4 moving = parts (3 cast iron rotors and an eccentric shaft). =0A=A0There's no camshaf= t, cam gears, rocker arms, intake or exhaust valves, =0Apushrods, lifters, = valve springs, keepers, connecting rods, caps, or bolts, =0Apiston pins, et= c. =A0- If it isn't there, it can't break.=A0=0A=0A2) 350hp (n/a p-port 3-r= otor)=0A=0A3) While parts are not exactly cheap (by automotive standards), = they are much =0Acheaper than certified a/c parts. =A0The typical overhaul = cost for a rotary engine =0Ais less than the cost of one jug for a certifie= d engine.=0A=0A4) Millions of rotary cars have been built; the rotary engin= e is well proven =0Atechnology.=0A=0A5) Cruise Fuel burn is for my p-ported= 3-rotor is14.5-15 gph, 23 gph in climb =0Amode. =A0However, the rotary can= burn mo-gas.=0A=0A6) No concern with shock cooling. =A0Just pull the throt= tle and descend, no worry.=0A=0A7) No hot-start issues. =A0=0A=0A8) Comes s= tock with 2 plugs/rotor, providing redundancy=A0=0A=0AThe stock rotary engi= ne redlines at 9000 rpm. =A0I typically cruise at 5200 rpm. =0A=A0Since the= rotors turn at 1/3 crank speed, the rotors are only turning 1733 rpm =0Ain= cruise. =A0If/when I want to go faster, I run it at 5900 rpm, the point on= the =0Arpm curve where there is the least amount of bearing load. =A0Even = at 5900 rpm, =0Athe rotors are turning less than 2000 rpm.=A0=0A=0AI'll be = the first to admit that the rotary route is not for everybody, and I'm =0An= ot trying to convince anyone to go down this path. =A0Personally, I'm extre= mely =0Apleased with my choice of engines and plan on flying it for many ye= ars to come. =0A=A0All I ask is that it is given a fair evaluation. =A0 =A0= =0A=0AMark S.=0AAustin, TX=0A=0A=0A=0AOn Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Gary = Casey wrote:=0A=0ALot's of interesting comments on t= he subject of alternate engines.=A0 I was =0Aconvinced I was going to use a= n automotive V-8 at one time, but the last straws =0Awere the difficulty (o= r impossibility) of getting insurance and the low (or =0Aimpossibility) of = resae value.=A0 As someone said, the resale value would likely =0Abe the sa= me as an aircraft without an engine.=A0 And my analysis showed that the =0A= installed cost would be about the same (or more)=A0then for an aircraft eng= ine.=A0 =0ABut the internals of any of these engines are robust and should= =A0able to tolerate =0Ahigh continuous power.=A0 My conclusions - opinions = of the disadvantages:=0A>=A0=0A>V-8 with reduction gear:=0A>Heavy - about 1= 50 pound penalty=0A>Complex installation and systems=0A>Slight fuel consump= tion penalty=0A>=A0=0A>V-8 engine direct drive turbocharged:=0A>Heavy - abo= ut 75 pound penalty=0A>Complex installation and systems=0A>=A0=0A>Rotary en= gine:=0A>Very complex installation and systems=0A>Heavy - up to 50 pound pe= nalty=0A>Potentially fragile apex seals=0A>Hgh cooling drag=0A>Noisy=0A>Sig= nificant fuel consumption penalty increases the weight penalty=0A>=A0=0A>Tu= rbine engine:=0A>High initial cost=0A>High fuel consumption negates any wei= ght savings=0A>=A0=0A>Misc. opinions:=A0 The liquid-cooled V-8 dates back t= o about 1918 when Chevrolet =0A>built the first mass-produced one, so it's = technology is even=A0older than the =0A>air-cooled engine's "30's technolog= y" that someone mentioned.=0A>=A0Gary Casey --0-1609058510-1307204685=:22879 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=0A
Mark,
=0A
   Again "Well Said" != !.........................<:)
 
=0A

Kelly Troyer
"DYKE DELTA JD2" (Eventually)

=0A

"13B ROTARY"_ Engine
"RWS"_RD1C/EC2/EM2
"MISTRAL"= _Backplate/Oil Manifold

=0A

"TURBONETICS"_TO4E50 Turbo

=0A

=
=0A

=0A
=0A
=0AFrom: Mark Steitle <msteit= le@gmail.com>
To: Rot= ary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sat, June 4, 2011 10:54:54 AM
<= B>Subject: [FlyRotary] Fwd: [L= ML] Re: L-IV Choice of Engine

Guys,  =0A

= =0A
Here's the latest posting on the Lancair list relating to alternati= ve (rotary) engines.  It will likely be my last posting as I feel that= my time would be better spent talking to my dog.

=0A
Mark=  
=0A

=0A
---------- Forwarded me= ssage ----------
From: Mark Steitle <msteitle@gmail.com><= /SPAN>
Date: Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 10:51 AM
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: L-IV= Choice of Engine
To: Lancair Mailing List <lml@lancaironline.net>


Hi Gary,  =0A
=0A
Since I have actually completed a successful rotary ins= tallation, I would like to comment on the rotary engine option.  =0A

=0A
First, addressing the negatives, 
=0A<= DIV>
=0A
1)  Apex seals - The apex seal issue has been so= lved long ago and is no longer an issue, unless the engine is over-boosted = and allowed to detonate; if this is a concern, do what the boosted guys do = and go with the oversized 3mm apex seals.  Even if the apex seal = issue was still an issue, losing an apex seal is equivalent to burning an e= xhaust valve.  The engine will still run, just be down on power. =
=0A

=0A
2) Insurance -  Obtaining full-coverag= e insurance has not been an issue for my ES, 
=0A

= =0A
3) Complex Systems - Not sure what you're referring with complex sy= stems (running EFI which also handles ignition);  Yes, I'm running 6 c= oils, but that provides redundancy, also running dual alternators/batteries= (Z-14 design) same as many others.  
=0A

=0A
&= nbsp;4)  weight is virtually the same as IO-540 (to the best of my rec= ollection, my ES weighed in at  2080#),
=0A
 
=0A5) Cooling drag - I will concede this one, but this can be minimized wit= h careful cooling design and the use of cowl flaps.  The P-51, and oth= ers, were liquid cooled.  As I recall, the Voyager was liquid cooled a= nd it made it around the globe non-stop.    
=0A

=0A
5) Rotary engine's exhaust is loud - Agree, but this can be hand= led with a turbo, a good muffler, sound insulation, and/or an ANR headset.<= /DIV>=0A

=0A

=0A
As for the rotary's positi= ves:
=0A

=0A
1)  The rotary is the epitome of t= he KISS principle.  The 20B (3-rotor) rotary engine has only 4 moving = parts (3 cast iron rotors and an eccentric shaft).  There's no camshaf= t, cam gears, rocker arms, intake or exhaust valves, pushrods, lifters, val= ve springs, keepers, connecting rods, caps, or bolts, piston pins, etc. &nb= sp;- If it isn't there, it can't break. 
=0A

=0A2) 350hp (n/a p-port 3-rotor)
=0A

=0A
3) While par= ts are not exactly cheap (by automotive standards), they are much cheaper t= han certified a/c parts.  The typical overhaul cost for a rotary engin= e is less than the cost of one jug for a certified engine.
=0A
=0A
4) Millions of rotary cars have been built; the rotary engin= e is well proven technology.
=0A

=0A
5) Cruise Fuel = burn is for my p-ported 3-rotor is14.5-15 gph, 23 gph in climb mode.  = However, the rotary can burn mo-gas.
=0A

=0A
6) No c= oncern with shock cooling.  Just pull the throttle and descend, no wor= ry.
=0A

=0A
7) No hot-start issues.  
=0A<= DIV>
=0A
8) Comes stock with 2 plugs/rotor, providing redundan= cy 
=0A

=0A
The stock rotary engine redlines at= 9000 rpm.  I typically cruise at 5200 rpm.  Since the rotors tur= n at 1/3 crank speed, the rotors are only turning 1733 rpm in cruise.  = ;If/when I want to go faster, I run it at 5900 rpm, the point on the rpm cu= rve where there is the least amount of bearing load.  Even at 5900 rpm= , the rotors are turning less than 2000 rpm. 
=0A

= =0A
I'll be the first to admit that the rotary route is not for everybo= dy, and I'm not trying to convince anyone to go down this path.  Perso= nally, I'm extremely pleased with my choice of engines and plan on flying i= t for many years to come.  All I ask is that it is given a fair evalua= tion.    
=0A

=0A
Mark S.
=0A
Aus= tin, TX
=0A
=0A
=0A
=0A


=0AOn Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Gary Casey <casey.gary@yahoo.com>= wrote:
=0A
=0A
=0A=0A

Lot's of interesting comments on the subject of alternate e= ngines.  I was convinced I was going to use an automotive V-8 at one t= ime, but the last straws were the difficulty (or impossibility) of getting = insurance and the low (or impossibility) of resae value.  As someone s= aid, the resale value would likely be the same as an aircraft without an en= gine.  And my analysis showed that the installed cost would be about t= he same (or more) then for an aircraft engine.  But the internals= of any of these engines are robust and should able to tolerate high c= ontinuous power.  My conclusions - opinions of the disadvantages:

= =0A

 

=0A

V-8 with reduction gear:

=0A

Heavy - about 150 p= ound penalty

=0A

Complex installation and systems

=0A

Slight fuel= consumption penalty

=0A

 

=0A

V-8 engine direct drive turbo= charged:

=0A

Heavy - about 75 pound penalty

=0A

Complex installat= ion and systems

=0A

 

=0A

Rotary engine:

=0A

Very compl= ex installation and systems

=0A

Heavy - up to 50 pound penalty

=0A<= P>Potentially fragile apex seals

=0A

Hgh cooling drag

=0A

Noisy=0A

Significant fuel consumption penalty increases the weight penalty=0A

 

=0A

Turbine engine:

=0A

High initial cost

=0AHigh fuel consumption negates any weight savings

=0A

 

=0A

= Misc. opinions:  The liquid-cooled V-8 dates back to about 1918 when C= hevrolet built the first mass-produced one, so it's technology is even = ;older than the air-cooled engine's "30's technology" that someone mentione= d.

=0A

 

=0A

Gary Casey



--0-1609058510-1307204685=:22879--