X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.241] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.2) with ESMTP id 2893236 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 04 May 2008 16:18:52 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.132.241; envelope-from=rwstracy@gmail.com Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b38so469686ana.81 for ; Sun, 04 May 2008 13:18:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=gEfJtrlvxj96oxqozdoZYQ1RxZsz33KgpTBCuYUYImM=; b=gqjbS7rJQQOzIWWfNxj0VCSaTKc9kz2sTL/DyMPW5qjG7P1b1m/hjznDpRgLg1fasQfXz49MvBeS7gEJGKKNdjeXbun1tmnYMhIAOxM7UJ8PVfk3Pg3dcWW30KjuzsiIqPw/KRAELahXu2/0mH9Zk1rVNX1bh1vNbFC/T/8JDSA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=xvB/1B9fvPR1L1MRMNFCNDG3i38VoZSArD9p/Ccj3a08WKVa+gY+0hp2WQviqsgSSjBco3xcKsaM1EtJutcHNrWgA3OdJhE6vbRFzsL7vDl/dER4goQZzEUlyqcBO6ZuJ4C/iX0AkboG8BExESLuWma2JwOcuJYWbSWqll2yYRQ= Received: by 10.100.4.1 with SMTP id 1mr6904363and.77.1209931926170; Sun, 04 May 2008 13:12:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.133.10 with HTTP; Sun, 4 May 2008 13:12:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1b4b137c0805041312o7d6b0fe4ud4f3459fd4ed70ab@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 4 May 2008 16:12:06 -0400 From: "Tracy Crook" Sender: rwstracy@gmail.com To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Jet A rotary approach [FlyRotary] Re: Jet-A In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_3051_9334245.1209931926160" References: X-Google-Sender-Auth: 84878c487791cf19 ------=_Part_3051_9334245.1209931926160 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Just curious, Why would someone want to do this? Is Jet-A cheaper? I haven't priced it lately. There would not be any power advantage (a power loss is noted by Mistral, using high pressure direct injection and spark ignition). There is no efficiency advantage because we can't run higher compression ratios. Is it just the novelty? Tracy On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Ed Anderson wrote: > Sounds good to me, just want to see it demonstrated first, before I go > chugging up to the Jet A fuel pump {:>). > > I will look forward to your article, Pat. Because I know this has been > tried numberous times before and while there have been various research > engines that ran with this configuration - my question is why did it never > evolve to an operational engine. > > It certainly may be possible, but I really don't think our current rotary > set up would do it. But here is a possible > approach................................ > > Ok, Dave, You put the Jet A in your tank and I'll pay for a tank of it. > But, first, I would check to make certain it doesn't gum up your > injectors/pumps or other such problems - because my understanding is that it > gets a lot more viscous at cooler temps than does gasoline. > > How about this approach, Dave - route the Jet A to say the primary or > secondary injectors (your choice) using some temporary fuel lines from an > external tank - then fire up the engine with the Mogas injectors only > active. Once warmed up and running switch on the secondary injectors with > the Jet A. Assuming that it continues to run (perhaps with some mixture > adjustment)with both the mogas and Jet A, then switch off the primary > (Mogas) injectors and see if it will continue to run. Using an external tank > would ensure that you do not contaminate your tanks and plumbing. > Recommend doing this on the ground {:>) > > Ed > > > > Perhaps the time has come? > > Ed > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Patrick Panzera > *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft > *Sent:* Sunday, May 04, 2008 12:05 PM > *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Re: Jet-A > > I love that scientific talk. > > > > Mistral is working on the JetA for fuel idea. > > > > RotaMax has done it. > > > > After they get done with their ASTM stuff to become an OEM engine for the > LSA market, > > they'll be focusing on their R&D efforts to complete their turbocharging > program. ASTM too. > > Then they'll get back to their original (and successful) efforts to run > their engines on heavy fuels > > via spark ignition and could eventually end up with a flexible-fuel > engine. They have also completed > > their propane r&d and are running in that trim for industrial > applications. > > > > I'm working on an exhaustive article on them for the next issue of > CONTACT! Magazine. > > > > Pat > > ------=_Part_3051_9334245.1209931926160 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline
Just curious,
Why would someone want to do this?  Is Jet-A cheaper?  I haven't priced it lately.  There would not be any power advantage (a power loss is noted by Mistral, using high pressure direct injection and spark ignition).  There is no efficiency advantage because we can't run higher compression ratios.  Is it just the novelty?
 
Tracy

On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com> wrote:
Sounds good to me,  just want to see it demonstrated first, before I go chugging up to the Jet A fuel pump {:>). 
 
 I will look forward to your article, Pat.  Because I know this has been tried numberous times before and while there have been various research engines that ran with this configuration - my question is why did it never evolve to an operational engine.
 
It certainly may be possible, but I really don't think our current rotary set up would do it.  But here is a possible approach................................
 
Ok, Dave, You put the Jet A in your tank and I'll pay for a tank of it.  But, first, I would check to make certain it doesn't gum up your injectors/pumps or other such problems - because my understanding is that it gets a lot more viscous at cooler temps than does gasoline.
 
How about this approach, Dave  - route the Jet A to say the primary or secondary injectors (your choice) using some temporary fuel lines from an external tank -  then fire up the engine with the Mogas injectors only active.   Once warmed up and running switch on the secondary injectors with the Jet A.  Assuming that it continues to run (perhaps with some mixture adjustment)with both the mogas and Jet A, then switch off the primary (Mogas) injectors and see if it will continue to run. Using an external tank would ensure that you do not contaminate your tanks and plumbing.   Recommend doing this on the ground {:>)
 
Ed
 
 
 
Perhaps the time has come?
 
Ed
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 12:05 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Jet-A

I love that scientific talk.

 

Mistral is working on the JetA for fuel idea.

 

RotaMax has done it.

 

After they get done with their ASTM stuff to become an OEM engine for the LSA market,

they'll be focusing on their R&D efforts to complete their turbocharging program. ASTM too.

Then they'll get back to their original (and successful) efforts to run their engines on heavy fuels

via spark ignition and could eventually end up with a flexible-fuel engine. They have also completed

their propane r&d and are running in that trim for industrial applications.

 

I'm working on an exhaustive article on them for the next issue of CONTACT! Magazine.

 

Pat


------=_Part_3051_9334245.1209931926160--