|
|
Dwayne,
To get HP with the rotary you will need
rpm. You should plan your take off to develop 7000-8000 rpm. That means
Tracy’s
2.85 PSRU and a climb prop. Most of us are using cruise props which will
not work in your application. Or you could go with the electric MT con$tant
speed prop to get the best of both worlds. It that rpm range, you can
develop over 200 HP normally aspirated at low altitudes. If you are going
to do high altitude takeoffs, you need a turbo or supercharger. I think
John Slade has figured out the turbo for the rotary.
Bill B
From: Rotary motors in aircraft
[mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On
Behalf Of Dwayne Parkinson
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 6:44
PM
To: Rotary
motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Bad
rotary week
Thanks for the quick reply.
I'm building a Bearhawk (4 seat, high wing) on floats so the extra HP is
needed especially for take off. I've looked extensively at using a
13B-REW to try to get the HP I need without adding the weight and unique parts
of a 20B, but turbo installations seem to get eaten by exhaust heat. I'm
unaware of anyone getting 100 hours out of a turbo. Is there anyone on
the list who has more than 100 hours on their turbo?
Thanks for the feedback!!!
From: George
Lendich <lendich@aanet.com.au>
To: Rotary
motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Mon, August 2, 2010 5:08:41
PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Bad
rotary week
I had a feeling things weren't going to plan, however unless
you need the extra power a 16X would deliver because of the larger
eccentric and volume, the 13B is still a good choice IMHO.
Give the volume is the same with the RX7 and RX8 the
power is the same. If more power is needed then PP or Turbo is the answer.
Personally I believe the best answers are in those driving
enhancements in the 13B development for Aviation. I'm hoping Bill Jepson will
be up and running with his lighter housings and PP design sooner rather than
later. He's not saying much as I believe he wants to leave the talking to the
testing results .
For anyone hoping that a 16X would
show up any time soon: not ... gonna ... happen. No RX7 and the RX8
is still powered by the Renesis for 2011.
As if that's not bad enough, when I
was at Oshkosh
I took in David Atkins rotary seminar. I came away pretty depressed
thinking that I probably won't put a rotary engine in my airplane. Is
everyone else really using 1 quart of oil every 5 hours? He also didn't
have much good to say about the Renesis in an aviation application which leads
me to conclude that the 16X will fare even worse in aviation applications as it
is tweaked to meet higher EPA requirements and produce more low end torque.
Is anyone but Tracy using a Renesis? I'd really like
to know what HP you're getting, what the fuel burn is and how it's holding up.
P.S. I couldn't find any
rotary planes on the field at Oshkosh.
Perhaps they sank into the mud.
|
|