X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.120] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with ESMTP id 2607410 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:07:16 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.120; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 ([24.74.103.61]) by cdptpa-omta06.mail.rr.com with SMTP id <20071220220637.BWBM26668.cdptpa-omta06.mail.rr.com@edward2> for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 22:06:37 +0000 Message-ID: <000301c84354$9f766730$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: superchargers electric Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:06:50 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 Yes, I agree. It is not infrequent that when unbelievable claims for performance parameters are made - they are made in isolation. For example measure flow with no obstruction would give high CFM flow rates Measure Stagnation pressure with no flow would give high boost pressure But, if you tried to get the flow rate your boost would drop very low. You will also see that same approach used when folks are making unrealistic claims about engine power and fuel consumption. Some I have seen for these small turboprop engines fall into that category. You would see 8 gph fuel consumption, then at another spot you would see 180 HP, etc. Well, you are not going to get 180HP from burning 8 gph in a turbine or in a piston engine. When pressed, one company claimed to have developed a new fuel injection system that gave them fantastic fuel economy. When you think what the airlines would pay for something that would just give them a couple of % additional fuel economy - it certainly didn't make much sense for a genius like that to be mucking around with experimental engines {:>). I think sometimes folks simply misinterpret or misunderstand the data - they climb on board and find it hard to get off the wagon when others point out possible flaws in the situation.. That old saying "..If it looks too good to be true ......" is hard to fault. Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ernest Christley" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 4:43 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: superchargers electric > Greg Ward wrote: >> Yet, their website advertises up to 8 PSI, and the motor doesn't look >> that big. Also the "Thrasher Motorsport" site that they talk about makes >> no mention of them. >> Curiouser, and curiouser. >> Greg > Possible they could get 8PSI of static, or maybe at idle, ie. they're > generating lots of pressure, but no flow? > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html >