X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail15.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.196] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c5) with ESMTPS id 943270 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 13 May 2005 18:38:56 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=211.29.132.196; envelope-from=lendich@optusnet.com.au Received: from george (d220-236-29-226.dsl.nsw.optusnet.com.au [220.236.29.226]) by mail15.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id j4DMc64N018051 for ; Sat, 14 May 2005 08:38:07 +1000 Message-ID: <007101c5580d$0efe4090$e21decdc@george> From: "George Lendich" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Aluminum side housings Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 08:42:35 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 > George Lendich wrote: > > >>We were discussing aluminum side and intermediate housings a couple of > >>weeks ago. A figure of somewhere around 15lbs per housing in weight > >>savings was thrown out. The exact figure isn't as important the fact > >>that several Delta builders have had to stack approximately that much > >>weight in the tail to get the proper W&B. > >> > >Ernest, > >Surface treatments are problematic- no real cost effective treatment as yet. > >Composite( aluminium and steel) housings don't save that much weight, I > >forget the exact figures but will save about 30 lbs, at best. A hell of a > >lot of work ( and cost) to get that 30 lbs. > > > > > > > > I tend to agree with you, George, but you have to balance the work > required to remove 30lbs from the engine against the work required to > remove 30lbs from my slim figure*. I won't even consider aluminum sides > until I do a (semi) final weight and balance. If it comes down to > aluminum housings or more junk-n-da-trunk, the debate will be wide open > again. > > (The humor will be apparent when you get to the email where Ed tells me > that I'm a little stout for his RV 8*) Ernest, Don't get me wrong I'm actually working on aluminium housings as we speak - however the truth of the exercise is fully evident when costs and weights are real, rather than anticipated. Machining anything is a hugely expensive part of any development and there's a lot of machining in end housings. Hey I'm on the diet too, but firewall forward weight is my main concern, for C of G requirements. George ( down under)