Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.66; envelope-from=ceengland@bellsouth.net
Message-ID: <43E5748B.8020907@bellsouth.net>
Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2006 21:44:11 -0600
From: Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Suitability of NPG for Rotary Engine use
References: <list-964690@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-964690@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Lehanover@aol.com wrote:

> 
>In a message dated 2/1/2006 10:34:29 PM Eastern Standard Time,  
>wschertz@ispwest.com writes:
>
>**  speculation/theory**
>
>
>
>The only reason for using this stuff is to make the people selling it  happy.
> 
>I have never seen it in a racing situation. Distilled water, maybe 10%  
>antifreeze, a teaspoon full of dishwashing soap. Put the 18-24 pound pressure  cap 
>on the make up tank. Get the air out of the system and that is the best you  
>can do. At 6,000 RPM the stock pump will empty the coolant in 10 seconds or  
>less.  
> 
>If it won't cool with the above setup, it isn't the setup. Its  
>airflow/exchanger size/ distribution.
> 
>All bets are off for turbo installations.
> 
>On cool days we run a 160 degree thermostat and tape off part of the  
>radiator (Griffin).
>Normally, (up to the hottest days) no thermostat, full radiator. Top temp  is 
>180. Oil is 190. 
>It takes a big oil radiator to cool a rotary. I have three 13 row  Setrabs.
> 
>If you watch the movies of the instruments after a race, you would think  the 
>engine must be junk. Not the case at all. Even an early downshift that takes  
>the engine right past the rev limit
>(the drivers other hobby) of 9,600 RPM has no affect at all.
> 
>I have yet to see an aircraft installation that looked like it could put  out 
>more than 200 HP.
>The two GM cores are enough for water. Oil is a poor transfer medium so it  
>takes a bigger cooler to do the same job (remove the same number of BTUs per  
>second). 
> 
>There is just no magic involved. There is no need to reinvent the wheel for  
>each installation.
>If you have cooling problems at 180 HP, how will you ever enjoy a 200 HP  
>installation? 
> 
>The HP is the easy part. Get the cooling right first.
> 
>Just my opinion,............I could be wrong.
> 
>Are there any opinions on a good airfoil for 2,400 pounds going 200  MPH?
> 
>Lynn E. Hanover
>

I remember some report of a race team (NASCAR, I think) going for a 
speed record on a banked closed course. Report was that the car, which 
was supposedly very successful in races, overheated fairly quickly when 
run flat out. Supposedly, the off-throttle time during racing is very 
significant in reducing total heat load of the engine. Again, 
supposedly, no such luxury is available in a/c. Is there any validity in 
the story or concepts presented?

Airfoil for 2400lbs @200mph: How about, find someone building an RV-10 & 
copy that?

Charlie