X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imo-d21.mx.aol.com ([205.188.144.207] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.11) with ESMTP id 2279644 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 02:20:50 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.144.207; envelope-from=WRJJRS@aol.com Received: from WRJJRS@aol.com by imo-d21.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.2.) id q.ceb.18a30c7a (42808) for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2007 02:20:08 -0400 (EDT) From: WRJJRS@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 02:20:08 EDT Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] engine mounts To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1187850008" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5042 X-Spam-Flag: NO -------------------------------1187850008 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 8/22/2007 7:22:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, rob@mum.edu writes: Here's a question for everyone. I just received a 20B Rotary from Bruce Turrentine to put in my BD4 which I currently fly with a Ford V6. Now, I need to build an engine mount for the 20B but I can't decide whether to use the s-beam mount or the flat plate mount like Tracy uses. They both have advantaged, but my question is, in a worst case scenario, like if I should through a prop blade, which of the two mounts mentioned above will keep the engine connected to the plane longer? Or are there other alternatives that might be better? I would love to hear any and all opinions on this subject. Robert Bollinger FM1099 MUM Fairfield IA 52557 (641)472-7000 ex2068 (641)919-3213 cell _rob@mum.edu_ (mailto:rob@mum.edu) Robert, Pretty hard to plan any mount to handle a prop blade throw! Without making an overweight mess the rest of the time. Just get a good prop and use either one. If I had to gamble and this was the senario I had to handle I would pick the plate. But it depends on how that plate is connected to the tubes! Bill Jepson ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour -------------------------------1187850008 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In a message dated 8/22/2007 7:22:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, rob@mum.= edu=20 writes:

<= FONT=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size= =3D2>

Here's a question for everyone.

I just received a 20B Rotary from Bruce=20 Turrentine to put in my BD4 which I currently fly with a Ford V6. Now,&nbs= p;I=20 need to build an engine mount for the 20B but I can't decide whether to us= e=20 the s-beam mount or the flat plate mount like Tracy uses. They both have=20 advantaged, but my question is, in a worst case scenario, like if I should= =20 through a prop blade, which of the two mounts mentioned above will keep th= e=20 engine connected to the plane longer? Or are there other alternatives= =20 that might be better?

I would love to hear any and all opinions= on this=20 subject.

Robert Bollinger
FM1099 MUM
Fairfie= ld IA=20 52557
(641)472-7000 ex2068
(641)919-3213 cell
rob@mum.edu

Robert,

Pretty hard to plan any mount to handle a prop blade throw! Witho= ut=20 making an overweight mess the rest of the time. Just get a good prop and use= =20 either one. If I had to gamble and this was the senario I had to handle I wo= uld=20 pick the plate. But it depends on how that plate is connected to the tubes!=20

Bill Jepson

Get a sne= ak peek of the all-new AOL.com. -------------------------------1187850008--