X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imf24aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.72] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.7f) with ESMTP id 953361 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:57:43 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.72; envelope-from=atlasyts@bellsouth.net Received: from ibm68aec.bellsouth.net ([68.213.226.209]) by imf24aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20060125165657.HXAX12910.imf24aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm68aec.bellsouth.net> for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:56:57 -0500 Received: from [192.168.0.103] (really [68.213.226.209]) by ibm68aec.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20060125165656.MSZO20827.ibm68aec.bellsouth.net@[192.168.0.103]> for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:56:56 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2) In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-26-987137766 Message-Id: <5A75FF85-8643-4741-B14B-F7C09D32EDD0@bellsouth.net> From: Buly Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Two Alternators? Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:55:27 -0500 To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2) --Apple-Mail-26-987137766 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; delsp=yes; format=flowed I would advise anybody building a rotary powered plane to do the W&B =20 before wiring the batteries permanently. I had mine installed and =20 fully wired per plans on the spar. Than I had tear everything out and =20= do it all over again at the nose of my CZ. Buly http://tinyurl.com/dcy36 On Jan 25, 2006, at 11:44 AM, Mark R Steitle wrote: > Al, > > Looking at a picture of your engine install (very nice), it appears =20= > that you=92re running the factory Mazda (Mitsubishi) alternator? If =20= > it is the same as those I have on hand, they weigh about 11#. My =20 > rationale is that two ND alternators weigh 5.5#/ea, so there is =20 > little to no weight penalty. If you could get by with a single ND =20 > unit, then you should see about 6# net savings. In the conversion, =20= > I gained a second wp belt as well as electrical redundancy. With =20 > the batteries back in the tail, I need plenty of amps to crank the =20 > 3-rotor (Batteries cross-feed during starting). Add an all =20 > electric panel, and I felt the weight of the extra battery was =20 > worth it. =46rom what I=92m told, most Lancair ES=92s are nose heavy, = at =20 > least with the IO-540 engine. Also, all the Lancair ES=92s I=92ve = seen =20 > are running two batteries, located in the tail. > > > > I=92ll be doing the W&B soon, so we=92ll see how it does compared to =20= > those =93certified=94 guys. > > > > Mark > > > > From: Rotary motors in aircraft =20 > [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Buly > Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 9:35 AM > To: Rotary motors in aircraft > Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Two Alternators? > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 25, 2006, at 10:23 AM, Al Gietzen wrote: > > > > > > > I have 2 alternators =96 although since I have 2 batteries and I=92m =20= > heavy (the plane that is) =96 I=92m considering taking one of the =20 > alternators out. I mounted the second alternator on the intake side =20= > just above where the water inlet is. This picture isn=92t very good =20= > =96 but you get the idea of where it is. It=92s a small 6lb. =20 > Powermaster alternator. > > > > Regards, > > Joe Hull > > > > It would seem that taking out one battery would get rid of more =20 > weight; unless you have some other reason for wanting to get rid of =20= > the second alternator. Although I=92d say a battery is more reliable =20= > than an alternator. > > > > I think two batteries and two alternators is redundant redundancy, =20 > and a weight penalty. But that=92s just me. > > > > Al > > > > > > > I'm with Al on this. I have one 70A alternator and two batteries at =20= > the nose for CG purpose. > > Bully > > --Apple-Mail-26-987137766 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=WINDOWS-1252 I would advise anybody building = a rotary powered plane to do the W&B before wiring the batteries = permanently. I had mine installed and fully wired per plans on the spar. = Than I had tear everything out and do it all over again at the nose of = my CZ.
http://tinyurl.com/dcy36
<= BR class=3D"khtml-block-placeholder">


On Jan = 25, 2006, at 11:44 AM, Mark R Steitle wrote:

Al,

Looking at a picture = of your engine install (very nice), it appears that you=92re running the = factory Mazda (Mitsubishi) alternator?=A0 If it is the same as those I = have on hand, they weigh about 11#.=A0 My rationale is that two ND = alternators weigh 5.5#/ea, so there is little to no weight penalty. =A0If = you could get by with a single ND unit, then you should see about 6# net = savings. =A0In the conversion, I gained a second wp belt as well as = electrical redundancy.=A0 With the batteries back in the tail, I need = plenty of amps to crank the 3-rotor (Batteries cross-feed during = starting). =A0Add an all electric panel, and I felt the weight of the = extra battery was worth it.=A0 =46rom what I=92m told, most Lancair ES=92s= are nose heavy, at least with the IO-540 engine.=A0 Also, all the = Lancair ES=92s I=92ve seen are running two batteries, located in the = tail.=A0

=A0

I=92ll be doing the W&B soon, so we=92ll see how it = does compared to those =93certified=94 guys.Mark=A0 = =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0

=A0

Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline= .net] Buly
Wednesday, = January 25, 2006 9:35 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
[FlyRotary] Re: = Two Alternators?

=A0

=A0



On Jan 25, 2006, at 10:23 AM, Al Gietzen = wrote:



=A0

I have 2 alternators =96 although since I have 2 batteries = and I=92m heavy (the plane that is) =96 I=92m considering taking one of = the alternators out. I mounted the second alternator on the intake side = just above where the water inlet is.=A0 This picture isn=92t very good =96= but you get the idea of where it is. It=92s a small 6lb. Powermaster = alternator.

=A0Regards,

Joe = Hull

=A0It would seem that taking out one battery would get rid of = more weight; unless you have some other reason for wanting to get rid of = the second alternator. Although I=92d say a battery is more reliable = than an alternator.=A0

I think two batteries and two alternators is redundant = redundancy, and a weight penalty.=A0 But that=92s just = me.=A0

Al

I'm with Al on this. I have one 70A alternator and = two batteries at the nose for CG purpose.Bully



<= /HTML>= --Apple-Mail-26-987137766--