|
Conventional wisdom has me confused.
Is it saying that the piston engine does a better job at converting the fuel to
work, and the Rotary wastes a lot of fuel to heat the engine? But haven't we had
reports of Rotaries flying formation with Lycs with equivalent airframes and
getting effectively the same fuel burn, thus blowing a whole in this whole BSFC
argument? Would the answer to my question be that at equal burn rates, the
Rotary would spit more heat out the exhaust and have less to reject through
other means, but it also wouldn't be producing as much power?
Yes. Depends on
your definition of "a lot". Tracy gets good numbers flying where the airframe
is most efficient. This is slower than most people fly. IIRC Tracy burned
about 1 gal an hour more than Charlie flying down to Texas. This was
not a perfect test and I am going by fallible memory of a phone
conversation with Charlie. Even if the fuel burn is 10% more it is really
not worth worrying about if you fly the normal 200hrs per year. If you
are worried about the 10% there are people out there who have the answer-Turbo
compound. All you need to do is spend about 10 million in development to get
your $800 a year in fuel back. Or you could just slow down and enjoy the view.
Don't we all want MORE time in the cockpit?
Now THERE is a no
brainer!
Monty
|