Message-ID: <40591B9A.1070902@netdoor.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 21:46:34 -0600
From: Charlie & Tupper England <cengland@netdoor.com>
Reply-To: cengland@netdoor.com
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Rev-2 Runs!
References: <list-3084046@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-3084046@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Finn Lassen wrote:

> No, they're left open. At the time I didn't realize one is supposed to 
> install bulkheads there. All I have is a strip of 1.5" wide .040 alu 
> lying flat following the cowl curve around. Stabilizes the cowl exits 
> a bit.
>
> You have the fiberglass extensions? Want to sell them cheap?
>
> Finn
>
> Russell Duffy wrote:
>
>> Hey Finn, I know you don't have the cowl extensions on your plane, 
>> but do you have the rear of the cowl cheeks blocked off, or are they 
>> open?  I'm thinking they're probably blocked off, but I can't recall 
>> for sure.  I looked at installing mine today, and realized that it 
>> was going to require significant work, since the rear cheek bulkhead 
>> doesn't come close to fitting.
>
>
FWIW, the CAFE Foundation's research has shown that using a cooling exit 
shape very similar to Finn's cheek exits might be the most efficient way 
to get air out of the cowl.

Charlie