X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.200] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.6) with ESMTP id 929422 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 00:46:49 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.233.184.200; envelope-from=russell.duffy@gmail.com Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 69so1189324wra for ; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:46:02 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:x-priority:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:in-reply-to:x-mimeole:importance; b=R0NzqdtmlRRLK2UQsVlCpr0hzODyZsllgx9ugrgbYI1MD0CG+raHkDk/iws145WhSL8CyZ4iBFNesybQa6x/dSxXe38lVNCtHy3FdzOjYUhH2AA/clHlM9qj94r0GIU3PfJMTJh9qlVMJkdf/NqfTg2Y2KGYFGHxHmd7NeYVs9g= Received: by 10.54.98.19 with SMTP id v19mr5864779wrb; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:46:01 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from rd ( [65.6.194.9]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id 66sm6403264wra.2006.01.16.21.46.01; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 21:46:01 -0800 (PST) From: "Russell Duffy" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] ducted fan Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:46:01 -0600 Message-ID: <017f01c61b29$4cde8b60$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0180_01C61AF7.02441B60" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 Importance: Normal This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0180_01C61AF7.02441B60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I could design and build something for your one-rotor but it wouldn't be cheap! (because of the time involved). Hi Perry, Just hold that thought for now. The other thing is that there's no reason to believe it would solve the torque reversal issue, so I'd better find out more about that before I start looking into the next option. BTW, we don't hear much from you. Is the non-ducted fan version still working out well? Thanks, Rusty ------=_NextPart_000_0180_01C61AF7.02441B60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

I could design and build something for your one-rotor = but it=20 wouldn't be
cheap! (because of the time involved).

 
Hi=20 Perry,
 
Just = hold that thought=20 for now.  The other thing is that there's no reason to believe it=20 would solve the torque reversal issue, so I'd better find out = more=20 about that before I start looking into the next=20 option.  
 
BTW, we = don't hear much=20 from you.  Is the non-ducted fan version still working = out=20 well?
 
Thanks,
Rusty
  



 ------=_NextPart_000_0180_01C61AF7.02441B60--