Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.71; envelope-from=atlasyts@bellsouth.net
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v750)
In-Reply-To: <list-1152986@logan.com>
References: <list-1152986@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <857D827C-E498-484E-9792-13F359D3C9C0@bellsouth.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Bulent Aliev <atlasyts@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Remove Turbo
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 17:23:58 -0400
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>


On Jun 13, 2006, at 5:03 PM, Joe Hull wrote:

>> Buly [said]
>> Debating if I should remove the turbo?
>>
>
> I was pushing hard a couple years ago to get a turbo - after  
> watching Dave
> Leonard's and John Slade's escapades - I decided I could do without  
> the
> complexity.  I may P-Port a test engine I've got sitting around and  
> see how
> that goes. You lose a little HP at altitude with a P-Port or any NA  
> engine -
> but you also lose a lot of complexity and risk. I'd rather give up  
> that
> chunk of risk - makes for more peaceful flying! (Now all I have to  
> worry
> about are the other 72 things that can go wrong!)
>
> Joe Hull
> Cozy Mk-IV #991 (In Phase1 Flight Test - 29.1 hrs flown)
> Redmond (Seattle), Washington
>
>

My engine was built with high compression rotors and very large (20B)  
intake ports. The turbo was an after thought of mine and John's. I  
have already removed the wastegate  and bored a hole for direct  
bypass of 25-30% of the exhaust gasses with a second exhaust pipe.  
The turbo is still hitting 50-60" MAP and is hard to control at the  
top end. I'm yet to open the engine to full throttle. Seems to me  
with the electric IVO 68" ( and 45" to 105" pitch range) prop I can  
get the RPM I need without the turbo?

Buly
http://tinyurl.com/dcy36