Ed Anderson wrote:

> Paul Lamar appears to have access to the FlyRotary List.  I just got a couple
> of blistering e mails from him.  In that somebody provided him a copy of an
> e mail exchange from this list.  

Let me add my voice to the chorus of those happy to have you here, Ed.

Personally, I'm a member of both lists, and I take everything EITHER side says with a grain of salt. Paul does often have a one-sided view of things, but he is still full of useful information, and they're currently debating a muffler design that looks very interesting to me. On the other hand, if the EWP works, it works, and I'll be happy enough with that. Cooling the rotary has turned out to be as much art as science anyway, since nobody has the perfect answer yet.

For what it's worth, my view is that Paul is very much a theoretician - he likes to prove his cases before he starts experimenting. The EWP is more "bucket chemistry" - toss some stuff into a bucket, and see what happens. Look, we didn't even have accurate data on impeller flow obstruction. In response to my e-mail the makers said the flow should be almost unobstructed, but (was it you, Russell? I forgot already!) somebody already showed that this is NOT the case, so we're back to talking about check valves and parallel setups.

There's enough that's unproven here that I'm acknowledging that I'll be taking a bit of both styles as I put this together. Then I'll test the hell out of it. And no battles.

=)

Regards,
Chad