Return-Path: Received: from [199.185.220.224] (HELO priv-edtnes40.telusplanet.net) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c2) with ESMTP id 777807 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 10 Mar 2005 02:18:26 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=199.185.220.224; envelope-from=haywire@telus.net Received: from Endurance ([207.81.25.155]) by priv-edtnes40.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.6.01.04.00 201-2131-118-20041027) with SMTP id <20050310071739.DKMO12547.priv-edtnes40.telusplanet.net@Endurance> for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2005 00:17:39 -0700 From: "Todd Bartrim" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Heater valve Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 23:17:34 -0800 Message-ID: <003601c52541$3bd93600$0201a8c0@Endurance> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0037_01C524FE.2DB5F600" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C524FE.2DB5F600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MessageEasier to plumb, No CO. Flying up here in the winter in a spam-can they are notorious for being very cold with pathetic amounts of heat being supplied by the heat-muff. While I've never really had to deal with this, I didn't want to either, when there is a better solution available. I honestly doubt that a regular sized heat muff could provide as much heat as what I get from the coolant. Also when the power is off there is much less heat available from the exhaust pipe, while the coolant is much more stable in temps. Another thing I've considered that may not be valid at all, but what about about noise? Is there any of the exhaust noise carried through the duct to the cabin? Todd (why doesn't Rusty have air conditioning?) Why? If I ever manage to not have the plane down during the winter, I will have to add heat. The current plan is a standard heat muff. Cheers, Rusty ------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C524FE.2DB5F600 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
Easier=20 to plumb, No CO. Flying up here in the winter in a spam-can they are = notorious=20 for being very cold with pathetic amounts of heat being supplied by the=20 heat-muff. While I've never really had to deal with this, I didn't want = to=20 either, when there is a better solution available. I honestly doubt that = a=20 regular sized heat muff could provide as much heat as what I get from = the=20 coolant. Also when the power is off there is much less heat available = from the=20 exhaust pipe, while the coolant is much more stable in=20 temps.
    Another thing I've = considered that=20 may not be valid at all, but what about about noise? Is there any of the = exhaust=20 noise carried through the duct to the cabin?
 
Todd    (why doesn't Rusty = have air=20 conditioning?)

Why?  If I ever manage to not have the plane = down=20 during the winter, I will have to add heat.  The current plan is = a=20 standard heat muff. 

Cheers,

Rusty

------=_NextPart_000_0037_01C524FE.2DB5F600--