X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com From: "Neil Unger" Received: from nskntmtas04p.mx.bigpond.com ([61.9.168.146] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.1.2) with ESMTPS id 7696279 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 16 May 2015 18:51:26 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=61.9.168.146; envelope-from=neil.unger@bigpond.com Received: from nskntcmgw08p ([61.9.169.168]) by nskntmtas04p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20150516225049.SRFU17640.nskntmtas04p.mx.bigpond.com@nskntcmgw08p> for ; Sat, 16 May 2015 22:50:49 +0000 Received: from UserPC ([101.174.186.234]) by nskntcmgw08p with BigPond Outbound id Umqj1q00L53rxU501mqk79; Sat, 16 May 2015 22:50:49 +0000 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=D6DF24tj c=1 sm=1 a=6LOQuyDnC94H78B51VJEoA==:17 a=1IlZJK9HAAAA:8 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=7g1VtSJxAAAA:8 a=xxXxEXd2BQw2dr9LZjwA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=Qa1je4BO31QA:10 a=6G5ITrGxruGFzcgS:21 a=hBNR0KuG9oa6075G:21 a=SSmOFEACAAAA:8 a=hpH463N7Vbz0tmyrTcsA:9 a=gKO2Hq4RSVkA:10 a=UiCQ7L4-1S4A:10 a=hTZeC7Yk6K0A:10 a=frz4AuCg-hUA:10 a=jR1-7JGAAY47CoMZ:21 a=KtaHPDd_GmpAdRWE:21 a=6LOQuyDnC94H78B51VJEoA==:117 Message-ID: <074941F61FB94C32B5BB7A846CB62D3B@UserPC> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Fw: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions for Ed Anderson- Plugs UP Oil System photo of bottom Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 08:50:42 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000F_01D0907E.8E7A8EA0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3555.308 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3555.308 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01D0907E.8E7A8EA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Neil Unger=20 Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2015 8:30 AM To: flyrotary administration=20 Subject: Fw: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions for Ed Anderson- Plugs UP Oil = System photo of bottom Admin says this was rejected and not posted. I cannot recall, so here it = is again. Neil From: Neil Unger=20 Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 8:07 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions for Ed Anderson- Plugs UP Oil = System photo of bottom Bill, Very, very interesting. I have a renisis with P port, supposedly = 250 HP. So I ordered a prop for that HP etc. Static on ground could = not get above 6300 rpm. Very little change in the air. The plane flew = well but certainly not 250 Hp worth. So eventually I ordered a ground = adjustable for 200 HP. With Factory setting of the prop, I can now get = 7500 rpm static, and again little more in the air. Without a dyno, I = believe that I am only getting 200 =E2=80=93 220 HP at best. So that is = fine if extra Hp is not required. I feel I am certainly not getting = the 250 HP being promoted. My new PSRU at 3.12 reduction should finally = be out by the end of the month, so with the extra engine revs, I might = push 230 Hp plus??? I dream on. I really do not need 250 HP, but = believe now that I will not get that even if I have to. Lots of noise = coming as I try and destroy the PSRU on the ground. Neil in OZ From: Bill Bradburry=20 Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 5:12 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions for Ed Anderson- Plugs UP Oil System = photo of bottom Well, I really like my rotary and I am happy that I chose that engine. = It is really smooth and I like the sound of it, but I have to admit that = I was led down the primrose path a bit on what to expect in performance. = I also think a lot of others are as well. We toss out HP numbers with = abandon but they have little to do with what you really get with the = engine. =20 The rotary is an RPM engine. It makes very little torque and gets its = HP from RPM. These RPMs are in ranges that we just don=E2=80=99t = achieve with the airplane. Nobody cruises at 8500 rpm, or even hits = that number on takeoff, yet that is the rpm that the HP numbers are = reported. =20 When I first cranked my engine, I had a Performance Prop that was = designed to give a 200 mph cruise at 6000 rpm. I could only get a = static rpm of about 4500 out of it. I was concerned that I would not = have enough power for a take off! I lucked out and found an MT electric = and I now start my takeoff run at 7100 rpm. I think that with my = homemade intake and exhaust, that I am somewhere between 180 and 200 HP = at that rpm. We are talking sea level here. When I moved to Texas I = noticed a definite loss of power taking off from a 1000 ft field vs a = field elevation of 55 ft. if you pull the rpms back to 5500-6000 for = cruise and climb up to 8000 ft, you are talking about a serious drop in = power. I am probably in the 125 hp range up there. I really would have = to think about it before I would land at a field that was 6-7K feet of = elevation. =20 I have attached a file of dynos of various engines. The top graph is a = 20B that is boosted to 45 inches. I doubt any of us would boost above = 38-40 inches, so all those numbers would be lower for us. The middle is = a 1987 NA 13B that is making about 165 HP at 6500 and the last is a = Renesis that is using the factory bells and whistles on the intake that = I had to remove and throw away. It is also a 6 port which breathes = better than the 4 port that I have. =20 So if you looked at one of those graphs and the power produced at your = rpm and reduced it by the altitude you are flying at, you will see that = you are not getting the power that you were probably thinking about when = you made the decision to install the engine. I am not saying anything = negative about the engines or my decision to install it. I am just = saying we should be realistic and understand what we are doing. =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]=20 Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 11:03 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions for Ed Anderson- Plugs UP Oil System = photo of bottom =20 Bill, I bought my 20B from another builder ($2600.) I thought about a two rotor of some sort with a turbo but it kind of = went against the logic of why I wanted a rotary in the first place. The difference in weight for 300hp (and simple) vs. ~260 with the turbo = was a good compromise in my judgement. =20 T Mann =20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01D0907E.8E7A8EA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 
From: Neil Unger
Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2015 8:30 AM
Subject: Fw: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions for Ed Anderson- = Plugs UP Oil=20 System photo of bottom
 
Admin says this was rejected and not posted. I cannot recall, so = here it is=20 again.  Neil
 
From: Neil Unger
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 8:07 AM
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions for Ed Anderson- = Plugs UP Oil=20 System photo of bottom
 
Bill, Very, very interesting.  I have a renisis with P port,=20 supposedly 250 HP.  So I ordered a prop for that HP etc.  = Static on=20 ground could not get above 6300 rpm.  Very little change in the = air. =20 The plane flew well but certainly not 250 Hp worth.  So eventually = I=20 ordered a ground adjustable for 200 HP.  With Factory setting of = the prop,=20 I can now get 7500 rpm static, and again little more in the air.  = Without a=20 dyno, I believe that I am only getting 200 =E2=80=93 220 HP at = best.  So that is=20 fine if extra Hp is not required.   I feel I am certainly not = getting=20 the 250 HP being promoted.  My new PSRU at 3.12 reduction should = finally be=20 out by the end of the month, so with the extra engine revs, I might push = 230 Hp=20 plus???   I dream on.  I really do not need 250 HP, but = believe=20 now that I will not get that even if I have to.  Lots of noise = coming as I=20 try and destroy the PSRU on the ground.  Neil in OZ
 
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 5:12 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Questions for Ed Anderson- Plugs UP = Oil=20 System photo of bottom
 

Well, I = really like my=20 rotary and I am happy that I chose that engine.  It is really = smooth and I=20 like the sound of it, but I have to admit that I was led down the = primrose path=20 a bit on what to expect in performance.  I also think a lot of = others are=20 as well.  We toss out HP numbers with abandon but they have little = to do=20 with what you really get with the engine.

 

The rotary is = an RPM=20 engine.  It makes very little torque and gets its HP from = RPM.  These=20 RPMs are in ranges that we just don=E2=80=99t achieve with the = airplane.  Nobody=20 cruises at 8500 rpm, or even hits that number on takeoff, yet that is = the rpm=20 that the HP numbers are reported.

 

When I first = cranked my=20 engine, I had a Performance Prop that was designed to give a 200 mph = cruise at=20 6000 rpm.  I could only get a static rpm of about 4500 out of = it.  I=20 was concerned that I would not have enough power for a take off!  I = lucked=20 out and found an MT electric and I now start my takeoff run at 7100 = rpm.  I=20 think that with my homemade intake and exhaust, that I am somewhere = between 180=20 and 200 HP at that rpm.  We are talking sea level here.  When = I moved=20 to Texas I=20 noticed a definite loss of power taking off from a 1000 ft field vs a = field=20 elevation of 55 ft.  if you pull the rpms back to 5500-6000 for = cruise and=20 climb up to 8000 ft, you are talking about a serious drop in = power.  I am=20 probably in the 125 hp range up there.  I really would have to = think about=20 it before I would land at a field that was 6-7K feet of=20 elevation.

 

I have = attached a file=20 of dynos of various engines.  The top graph is a 20B that is = boosted to 45=20 inches.  I doubt any of us would boost above 38-40 inches, so all = those=20 numbers would be lower for us.  The middle is a 1987 NA 13B that is = making=20 about 165 HP at 6500 and the last is a Renesis that is using the factory = bells=20 and whistles on the intake that I had to remove and throw away.  It = is also=20 a 6 port which breathes better than the 4 port that I=20 have.

 

So if you = looked at one=20 of those graphs and the power produced at your rpm and reduced it by the = altitude you are flying at, you will see that you are not getting the = power that=20 you were probably thinking about when you made the decision to install = the=20 engine.  I am not saying anything negative about the engines or my = decision=20 to install it.  I am just saying we should be realistic and = understand what=20 we are doing.

 

From:=20 Rotary motors in aircraft=20 [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 = 11:03=20 AM
To: = Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Questions for Ed=20 Anderson- Plugs UP Oil System photo of = bottom

 

Bill,

I bought = my 20B from=20 another builder ($2600.)

I thought = about a=20 two rotor of some sort with a turbo but it kind of went against the = logic of why=20 I wanted a rotary in the first place.

The = difference in=20 weight for 300hp (and simple) vs. ~260 with the turbo was a good = compromise in=20 my judgement.

 

T=20 Mann

 

--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and=20 UnSub:  =20 http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
------=_NextPart_000_000F_01D0907E.8E7A8EA0--