X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fed1rmmtao104.cox.net ([68.230.241.42] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.13) with ESMTP id 3586136 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 19 Apr 2009 11:24:18 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.42; envelope-from=rv-4mike@cox.net Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao104.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20090419152340.YAGX16134.fed1rmmtao104.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net> for ; Sun, 19 Apr 2009 11:23:40 -0400 Received: from wills ([68.105.85.56]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id hTPe1b00B1CvZmk04TPgkG; Sun, 19 Apr 2009 11:23:40 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=TNEM3s4zcy6fZsD9MV4A:9 a=9A-JG8mVZfVozeA1tO0A:7 a=CamBAxXZJDdS8cWg_ujJw0qRkAoA:4 a=kviXuzpPAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=PUVJ3v7iZ9hNA8eaa3EA:9 a=W7YGq53KhJ_Vft4nwg0A:7 a=NqyozywqwneyuyYo1EdoCc2uCCEA:4 a=4vB-4DCPJfMA:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Message-ID: <8A5A5EDB416D4A7694FB1FA0BE745379@wills> From: "Mike Wills" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Forced landings Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 08:23:38 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002C_01C9C0C8.23C253E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_002C_01C9C0C8.23C253E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Al, OK, I can accept that. It may seem from some of my recent posts that = I'm down on the rotary - not the case. I just want to make sure that we = paint a fair picture which is frequently not the case on an enthusiasts = website. I'm probably a little negatively biased right now having done my first = couple of flights, come across a couple of problems that are unresolved, = and am currently grounded. I really want to fly this thing again but = havent had as much time as I would like to fix the problems and get it = airworthy again. Mike Wills RV-4 N144MW ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Al Gietzen=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 1:08 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Forced landings Al, I understand and agree with what you are saying regarding the = experimental nature of these one off installations. But if you dont = compare them to the norm, what do you compare them to? I guarantee you = that is what the LyCont flyers are comparing them to Mike; Sorry I wasn't clear - I meant it wasn't a fair comparison during the = first couple hundred hours, while we are still in the debugging phase. = After tha, go ahead and compare. If we can get to some comparable = reliability level in that short a time, compared to their 100's of = thousands of hours, we're really on to something. I'm actually not an avid proponent of alternative engines. I just = happened to have chosen that route, and it's been a rewarding challenge; = and working well. Al G ------=_NextPart_000_002C_01C9C0C8.23C253E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Al,
 
 OK, I can accept that. It may = seem from some=20 of my recent posts that I'm  down on the rotary - not the case. I = just want=20 to make sure that we paint a fair picture which is frequently not the = case on an=20 enthusiasts website.
 
 I'm probably a little negatively = biased right=20 now having done my first couple of flights, come across a couple of = problems=20 that are unresolved, and am currently grounded. I really want to fly = this thing=20 again but havent had as much time as I would like to fix the problems = and get it=20 airworthy again.
 
Mike Wills
RV-4 N144MW
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Al = Gietzen=20
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 = 1:08=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Forced = landings

Al,

 

 I understand and = agree with=20 what you are saying regarding the experimental nature of these one off = installations. But if you dont compare them to the norm, what do you = compare=20 them to? I guarantee you that is what the LyCont flyers are comparing = them=20 to

Mike;

 

Sorry I = wasn=92t=20 clear =96 I meant it wasn=92t a fair comparison during the first = couple hundred=20 hours, while we are still in the debugging phase. After tha, go ahead = and=20 compare.  If we can get to some comparable reliability level in = that=20 short a time, compared to their 100=92s of thousands of hours, we=92re = really on=20 to something.

 

I=92m = actually not an=20 avid proponent of alternative engines.  I just happened to have = chosen=20 that route, and it=92s been a rewarding challenge; and working=20 well.

 

Al=20 G

 

------=_NextPart_000_002C_01C9C0C8.23C253E0--