X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from fmailhost03.isp.att.net ([204.127.217.103] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.16) with ESMTP id 3884544 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 12:59:39 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=204.127.217.103; envelope-from=keltro@att.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; q=dns/txt; d=att.net; s=dkim01; i=keltro@att.net; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1255453179; h=Content-Type: MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Message-Id:Date:Subject:To:From; bh=L5q4L0 BxCFCMXcCShh37yPSl9gGocprw/x9urZg0FJU=; b=OhQEeThLMRyRx5ARWZv2Op6n3 C3uS568sA+uxL75yJO5KiThwNMCZBQlJmnVhv4GpuPjm+C9Oje1DC67TzEwkg== Received: from fwebmail08.isp.att.net ([207.115.11.158]) by isp.att.net (frfwmhc03) with SMTP id <20091013165904H0300ppiuie>; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:59:04 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [207.115.11.158] Received: from [208.114.37.47] by fwebmail08.isp.att.net; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:59:03 +0000 From: "Kelly Troyer" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Lockheed "Q-Star" was Your muffler Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:59:03 +0000 Message-Id: <101320091659.20889.4AD4B1D70004ABDD0000519922230703729B0A02D29B9B0EBF019D9B040A05@att.net> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Mar 2 2009) X-Authenticated-Sender: a2VsdHJvQGF0dC5uZXQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_20889_1255453143_0" --NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_20889_1255453143_0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Guys, A little of subject but it does have a Rotary engine !!................. Main menuLargerNext Visschedijk photo Visschedijk menu 09/30/2007. In 1968 Lockheed Missiles and Space Co. acquired a Schweizer SG= S 2-32 X-26 glider from the US Navy Test Pilot School and modified it as a = quiet flight research and development aircraft. Initially it was powered by= a conventional Continental O-200 engine mounted behind the cockpit driving= a propeller mounted on a pylon at the aircraft=E2=80=99s nose. Later it was re-engined (pictured) with a Curtiss-Wright RC2-60 liquid-cool= ed rotary (Wankel) engine and square Corvette radiator was fitted at the no= se. The aircraft flew with various sizes and shapes of three-, four- and si= x-bladed propellers. -- Kelly Troyer=20 "Dyke Delta"_13B ROTARY Engine=20 "RWS"_RD1C/EC2/EM2=20 "Mistral"_Backplate/Oil Manifold=20 -------------- Original message from "Dean Van Winkle" : --------------=20 George I went back to Google using the search title "Lockheed Q-Star Aircraft" and= brought up a slightly different first page. Suggest you select three title= s on that page. 1. "Lockheed Q-Star" This shows the aircraft flying along the coast with= the 185 hp Curtiss-Wright engine, a square Corvette radiator in the nose a= nd an up turned exhaust behind the engine. 2 . "Lockheed Q-Star-Tanner -Hiller Airport" This has several photos and= says the aircraft is for sale. The last photo shows 2 cylinder type muffle= rs side by side and the up turned exhaust housed within the engine fairing.= =20 3. "Lockheed Combined Sailplane & Slow Turning Propeller-July '96 Aviatio= n History Feature". Additional information on the aircraft. A later entry said the aircraft was not for sale. It may be in a museum by= now. I chose not to search the other 14,000 entries under that search titl= e. Hope this info will help a little bit. Dean Van Winkle=20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: George Lendich=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 1:09 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Your muffler Dean,=20 Did you get the details of the muffler? George ( down under) Mike, etal Mid June, 1968, I was employed by the U S Army Aviation Systems Cmd in St L= ouis as a Dept of Army Civilian Aeronautical Engineer and assigned to the F= ixed Wing Project Engineering Office. Shortly thereafter, I was tasked with= evaluating several Engineering Change Proposals on the YO-3A aircraft. Ea= rly flight testing had uncovered some structural weakness in the new retrac= table main landing gear installation in the wings that were now repositione= d as low wings, and other areas of the aircraft. This may be common knowled= ge to most if not all of you but the eleven YO-3A production all flew with = Continental IO-360 210 hp engines and never with rotary engines. There was = a 12 V- belt reduction driving a 6 blade fixed pitch wooden propeller, late= r replaced with 3 blade constant speed wooden propellers. The earlier quiet= development aircraft, the QT-2, the two QT-2 Prize Crew aircraft that did = Operational Evaluation in Vietnam, and the Lockheed Q Star propeller eval a= ircraft all had Continental O-200 100hp engines with reduction drives, high= -mounted behind the cockpit, with a long drive shaft and pylon on the nos= e supporting the propeller end. The two QT-2 Prize Crew aircraft had a seat= for the observer behind the pilot. The Q Star had a conventional main land= ing gear similar to a Cessna 180 and was the only one to also test the Curt= iss-Wright FC2-60 Wankel rotary engine. The Info came from Google "YO-3A Ai= rcraft" . The header " Quiet Aircraft Association" was on the first page of= Google. The first page of QAA lists both test engines for the Q Star and a= photo collage of all 4 aircraft is about mid -article. I gave up searching= for any further data on the Curtiss-Wright installation. Dean Van Winkle Slo Build RV-9A '89 -13B, RD-1B, EC2, EM2, Mistral Intak= e ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Mike Wills=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:26 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Your muffler George, I agree with you on getting the muffler out of the cowl. But I know= there are those that would like to keep it under cowl, and of course the c= anard guys probably dont have a choice. For a canard this could be a good w= ay to go. There's a youtube video from a guy restoring a YO-3A up in the LA area. It'= s pretty dry but a minute in there is a shot of the exhaust system unfaired= . I'd like to know what if anything is in that muffler at the front. Behind= that muffler is what the guy refers to as a "piccolo tube" which is also e= nclosed in the fairing. The fairing and the fuselage side are lined with ab= sorbant material held in place with a metal screen. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DrIhK8PWRMbI Mike Wills RV-4 N144MW ----- Original Message -----=20 From: George Lendich=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 2:12 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Your muffler Thanks Mike, For your kind comments, but I must emphasize that this design is designed = primarily for outside cowl use. I understand that this, to some people, mig= ht give rise to concerns of extra drag - but to my mind anything to get the= heat out of the cowl. For my own design I envisage the muffler sitting within a half circle reces= s formed in the cowl, but there no reason that it can't sit behind the cowl= under the fuselage. If your talking about the long under fuselage design which forms part of th= e fuselage, I must admit I like that design as well. The longer the better = in my opinion, you could string a number of light weight mufflers along a l= ine, each feeing into the next with cooling air mixing in, as well as cool= ing the OD. That would be super quiet. I notice the best muffling ( to date= ) is done with more than one muffler i.e. a primary and a secondary. I'm not trying to convince anyone this is the best design, merely putting i= t up for possible solution to the problem. As you and others have said, of= f-the-shelf types aren't lasting anywhere near long enough. Bill Jepson and= I laboured over this design for some time, before we came to the final des= ign, I have been unable to finish my single so haven't been able to test it= yet - but it sure looks good. George ( down under) OK George, my memory is now jogged having seen your drawing. I liked the de= sign when I saw it the first time but discounted it for my application beca= use I couldnt see a good way to make any muffler with a tangential entry fi= t my airframe. This is the same reason I passed on Al's proven muffler desi= gn. I think the use of cooling airflow introduced into the muffler makes a lot = of sense and this is something your design has in common with the YO-3A muf= fler I've been talking about. I believe the YO-3A design would prove superi= or by virtue of the greatly increased volume of the muffler and the use of = absorptive materials. Of course until someone builds one and tries it who knows if it will hold u= p to the abusive exhaust output of a rotary. But the YO-3A design does have= the advantage of being flight proven in a pretty tough environment - low a= ltitude recon in Vietnam. Your muffler design (or Al's) is a winner if the goal is to keep the muffle= r within the confines of the cowl. My cowl is already too tight without a m= uffler in it. Mike Wills RV-4 N144MW=20 ----- Original Message -----=20 From: George Lendich=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:18 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Your muffler Al, Not tested yet, but have one almost complete for the single. The cones are there to stop the sound waves having a direct line of sight o= ut the rear end, the sound waves will be going all over the place within th= e exhaust and I tried to replicate that with the zig zaggy lines. There is no restriction as the area around the back to back cones, is equal= to the area of the 2" exhaust manifold area. However I do take your point on swirl restriction, but I don't see a proble= m as it will swirl out the end, whereas sound waves travel in a straight li= ne ( I think). Bill did have me put in a reflector plate opposite the inco= ming exhaust, but I don't know if this will interrupt the swirl motion, I s= uspect it might. The reflector plate is on the LHS of the parts count - pho= to attached. George ( down under) George; Nice design. Has anyone run one of these yet. My concern with the tangential muffler is something called =E2=80=98swirl f= low choking=E2=80=99 =E2=80=93 discovered in connection with a similar atte= mpt with gas turbine exhaust. High circumferential velocity tends to keep = the flow from moving out the end, and consequent pressure buildup. I don= =E2=80=99t know whether it applies to the pulsed flow, but it might, and yo= ur conical restriction toward the outlet could make it worse.=20 To avoid that possibility in my tangential muffler I added internal vanes a= t a 45 degree angle opposite the ports, and extended the header pipes into = muffler to a squared end. Disrupts the circumferential flow and helps direc= t the exhaust toward the exit. Your depiction of the idealized sounds waves going axially; ah-h, well; may= be/maybe notJ. Al G -----Original Message----- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Beh= alf Of George Lendich Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 1:14 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Your muffler Kelly There you go matey. All off the shelf SS cones and tube. George ( down under) ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Kelly Troyer=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:32 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Your muffler George, Do you have a photo or drawing available of your muffler design.........= .I seem to remember seeing some design info in the past but do not know where to find = it...... Thanks, -- Kelly Troyer=20 "Dyke Delta"_13B ROTARY Engine=20 "RWS"_RD1C/EC2/EM2=20 "Mistral"_Backplate/Oil Manifold=20 =20 -------------- Original message from "George Lendich" : --------------=20 > Ed,=20 > Cones are the GO.=20 >=20 > Any bare edge will take a battering from the heat and shock waves. Cones= =20 > formed back to back eliminate any edges.=20 >=20 > There must be supporting structure for the cones, I've used 1/4" solid=20 > round bar welded into the exhaust skin.=20 > George (down under)=20 -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.= html --NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_20889_1255453143_0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_20889_1255453143_1" --NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_20889_1255453143_1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Guys,
   A little of subject but it does have a Rotary engine !!..= ...............
 

3D"Lockheed

=

Ma= in menu

Larger

Next Visschedijk photo
Visschedijk menu


09/30/2007. In 1968 Lockheed Missiles and Space Co. acq= uired a Schweizer SGS 2-32 X-26 glider from the US Navy Test Pilot School a= nd modified it as a quiet flight research and development aircraft. Initial= ly it was powered by a conventional Continental O-200 engine mounted behind= the cockpit driving a propeller mounted on a pylon at the aircraft=E2=80= =99s nose.

Later it was re-engined (pictured) with a Curtiss-Wright = RC2-60 liquid-cooled rotary (Wankel) engine and square Corvette radiator wa= s fitted at the nose. The aircraft flew with various sizes and shapes of th= ree-, four- and six-bladed propellers.

 
--
Kelly Troyer
"Dyke Delta"_1= 3B ROTARY Engine
"RWS"_RD1C/EC2/EM2
"Mistral"_Backplate/Oil Manifol= d



 
-------------- Original message from "Dean Van Winkle" <d= vanwinkle@royell.org>: --------------

George
 
I went back to Google using the search tit= le "Lockheed Q-Star Aircraft" and brought up a slightly different first pag= e. Suggest you select three titles on that page.
 
1.  "Lockheed Q-Star"   Thi= s shows the aircraft flying along the coast with the 185 hp Curtiss-Wright = engine, a square Corvette radiator in the nose and an up turned exhaust beh= ind the engine.
 
2 .  "Lockheed Q-Star-Tanner -Hi= ller Airport"   This has several photos and says the aircraft is = for sale. The last photo shows 2 cylinder type mufflers side by side a= nd the up turned exhaust housed within the engine fairing. 
 
3.   "Lockheed Combined Sailplan= e & Slow Turning Propeller-July '96 Aviation History Feature".  Ad= ditional information on the aircraft.
 
A later entry said the aircraft was not fo= r sale.  It may be in a museum by now. I chose not to search the other= 14,000 entries under that search title.  Hope this info will help a l= ittle bit.
 
Dean Van Winkle 
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 1:09= AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Your muffle= r

 
Dean,
Did you get the details of the muffler?
George ( down under)
 
Mike, etal
 
Mid June, 1968, I was employed by the U S = Army Aviation Systems Cmd in St Louis as a Dept of Army Civilian Aeronautic= al Engineer and assigned to the Fixed Wing Project Engineering Office. Shor= tly thereafter, I was tasked with evaluating several Engineering Change Pro= posals on the YO-3A  aircraft. Early flight testing had uncovered some= structural weakness in the new retractable main landing gear installa= tion in the wings that were now repositioned as low wings, and other areas = of the aircraft. This may be common knowledge to most if not all of you but= the eleven YO-3A production all flew with Continental IO-360 210 hp engine= s and never with rotary engines. There was a 12 V- belt reduction driving a= 6 blade fixed pitch wooden propeller, later replaced with 3 blade constant speed wooden propellers. The earli= er quiet development aircraft, the QT-2, the two QT-2 Prize Crew aircr= aft that did Operational Evaluation in Vietnam, and the Lockheed Q Star pro= peller eval aircraft all had Continental O-200 100hp engines with reduction= drives, high -mounted behind the cockpit, with a long drive shaft&nbs= p; and pylon on the nose supporting the propeller end. The two QT-2 Prize C= rew aircraft had a seat for the observer behind the pilot. The Q Star had a= conventional main landing gear similar to a Cessna 180 and was the only on= e to also test the Curtiss-Wright FC2-60 Wankel rotary engine.&nb= sp;The Info came from Google "YO-3A Aircraft" . The header " Quiet Air= craft Association" was on the first page of Google. The first page of QAA l= ists both test engines for the Q Star and a photo collage of all 4 aircraft= is about mid -article. I gave up searching for any further data on the Cur= tiss-Wright installation.
 
Dean Van Winkle   Slo Build RV-9= A  '89 -13B, RD-1B, EC2, EM2, Mistral Intake
----- Original Message -----
= From: Mike= Wills
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:26 = PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Your muffle= r

George, I agree with you on getting the mu= ffler out of the cowl. But I know there are those that would like to keep i= t under cowl, and of course the canard guys probably dont have a choice. Fo= r a canard this could be a good way to go.
 
There's a youtube video from a guy restori= ng a YO-3A up in the LA area. It's pretty dry but a minute in there is a sh= ot of the exhaust system unfaired. I'd like to know what if anything is in = that muffler at the front. Behind that muffler is what the guy refers to as= a "piccolo tube" which is also enclosed in the fairing. The fairing and th= e fuselage side are lined with absorbant material held in place with a meta= l screen.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DrIhK8PWRMbI
 
Mike Wills
RV-4 N144MW
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 2:12 = PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Your muffle= r

 
Thanks Mike,
For your kind comments, but I must emphasiz= e that this design is  designed primarily for outside cowl use. I unde= rstand that this, to some people, might give rise to concerns of extra drag= - but to my mind anything to get the heat out of the cowl.
 
For my own design I envisage the muffler si= tting within a half circle recess formed in the cowl, but there no reason t= hat it can't sit behind the cowl under the fuselage.
 
If your talking about the long under fusela= ge design which forms part of the fuselage, I must admit I like that design= as well. The longer the better in my opinion, you could string a number of= light weight mufflers along a line, each feeing into the next with cooling= air mixing in,  as well as cooling the OD. That would be super quiet.= I notice the best muffling ( to date) is done with more than one muffler i= .e. a primary and a secondary.
 
I'm not trying to convince anyone this is t= he best design, merely putting it up for possible solution to the problem.&= nbsp; As you and others have said, off-the-shelf types aren't las= ting anywhere near long enough. Bill Jepson and I laboured over this design= for some time, before we came to the final design, I have been unable to f= inish my single so haven't been able to test it yet - but it sure looks goo= d.
 
George ( down under)
 
OK George, my memory is now jogged having = seen your drawing. I liked the design when I saw it the first time but disc= ounted it for my application because I couldnt see a good way to make = any muffler with a tangential entry fit my airframe. This is the same reaso= n I passed on Al's proven muffler design.
 
I think the use of cooling airflow introdu= ced into the muffler makes a lot of sense and this is something your design= has in common with the YO-3A muffler I've been talking about. I believe th= e YO-3A design would prove superior by virtue of the greatly increased volu= me of the muffler and the use of absorptive materials.
 
Of course until someone builds one and tri= es it who knows if it will hold up to the abusive exhaust output of a rotar= y. But the YO-3A design does have the advantage of being flight proven in a= pretty tough environment - low altitude recon in Vietnam.
 
Your muffler design (or Al's) is a wi= nner if the goal is to keep the muffler within the confines of the cowl. My= cowl is already too tight without a muffler in it.
 
Mike Wills
RV-4 N144MW 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:1= 8 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Your muffle= r

Al,
Not tested yet, but have one almost comple= te for the single.
 
The cones are there to stop the sound wave= s having a direct line of sight out the rear end, the sound waves will= be going all over the place within the exhaust and I tried to replicate th= at with the zig zaggy lines.
 
There is no restriction as the area around= the back to back cones, is equal to the area of the 2" exhaust manifold&nb= sp;area.
 
However I do take your point on swirl rest= riction, but I don't see a problem as it will swirl out the end, whereas so= und waves travel in a straight line ( I think).  Bill did have me put in a reflector plate opposite the incomi= ng exhaust, but I don't know if this will interrupt the swirl motion, I sus= pect it might. The reflector plate is on the LHS of the parts count - = photo attached.
 
George ( down under)

George;

 = ;

Nice design.  = Has anyone run one of these yet.

My concern with the= tangential muffler is something called =E2=80=98swirl flow choking=E2=80= =99 =E2=80=93 discovered in connection with a similar attempt with gas turb= ine exhaust.  High circumferential velocity tends to keep the flow fro= m moving out the end, and consequent pressure buildup.  I don=E2=80=99= t know whether it applies to the pulsed flow, but it might, and your conica= l restriction toward the outlet could make it worse.

 = ;

To avoid that possi= bility in my tangential muffler I added internal vanes at a 45 degree angle= opposite the ports, and extended the header pipes into muffler to a square= d end. Disrupts the circumferential flow and helps direct the exhaust towar= d the exit.

 = ;

Your depiction of t= he idealized sounds waves going axially; ah-h, well; maybe/maybe not= J.

 = ;

Al G<= /P>

 = ;

-----Original Mess= age-----
From: Rotary mo= tors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of George Lendich
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 1:14 PM
= To: Rotary motors in aircra= ft
Subject: [FlyRotary] = Re: Your muffler

 

Kelly<= /P>

There you go matey. = All off the shelf SS cones and tube.

George ( down under)=

----- Original Messa= ge -----

<= FONT size=3D2 face=3DArial>From:<= SPAN style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: Arial; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> Kelly Troyer

Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:32 PM

[FlyRotary] Your muffler

 

  George,

   Do you have a p= hoto or drawing available of your muffler design..........I seem to<= /FONT>

remember seeing some design = info in the past but do not know where to find it......

 

 

Thanks,

--
Kelly Troyer
"Dyke Delta"_13B ROTARY Engine
"RWS"= _RD1C/EC2/EM2
"Mistral"_Backplate/Oil Manifold


 

-------------- Original mess= age from "George Lendich" <lendich@aanet.com.au>: --------------
=

> Ed,
> Cones are the GO.
>
> Any bare edge= will take a battering from the heat and shock waves. Cones
> formed= back to back eliminate any edges.
>
> There must be supporti= ng structure for the cones, I've used 1/4" solid
> round bar welded = into the exhaust skin.
> George (down under)

--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub= :   http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
--NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_20889_1255453143_1-- --NextPart_Webmail_9m3u9jl4l_20889_1255453143_0--