Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #31906
From: Tracy Crook <lors01@msn.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions from a potential rotaryphile
Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 09:55:17 -0400
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 1:09 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions from a potential rotaryphile

Kelly,
And all, The Powersport system used in the test did NOT have leaning capacity. The Powersport principle owner reported on the other list. Hen said the system was far from optimized. He also commented the next system will allow +- 10% on mixture. The comment was also made that the new exhaust system is much quieter. The original was 92-93 DB at 50' which is loud. The new system is expansive but reported to be 89 DB which is much quieter. For aircraft use tuning will result in much better fuel burns. We also seem to need to be sure to have somekind of dynamic mixture control.
Bill Jepson
 
 
My main complaint about the Powersport / Lyc comparo article was that they kept referring to the Powersport system as FADEC.  It is NOT FADEC nor did it have leaning capability.  The 'FA' in FADEC stands for Full Authority.   If the pilot is directly linked to the throttle plate of the engine, the ECU does not have 'Full Authority' to manage the system.   I've explained why this is important in past messages, no time to repeat it now, but it is a vitally important  point.
 
BTW, + - 10% is not NEAR enough range for the rotary.  The EC2 allows + - 33%.  The + 33 is more than enough but the -33 is definitely needed.
 
The only other complaint with the article was the comment about me "bragging that my engine cost less than my head sets".   I said that about my first engine.  When it's true, it ain't bragging.
 
Tracy 
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster