Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #48093
From: Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Boost controller or not: [FlyRotary] Re: Regarding Scott Emer...
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 07:59:38 -0400
To: 'Rotary motors in aircraft' <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>

Sorry bout that, Scott.  I misinterpreted Good short field performance as max power take off.  But, as I said - so long as you understand the limitations of the no-boost control approach and want the power on the top end, it’s certainly possible to do it by correct sizing of the a/r of the turbine housing.

 

Ed

 


From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of SHIPCHIEF@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:05 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Boost controller or not: [FlyRotary] Re: Regarding Scott Emer...

 

In a message dated 9/8/2009 2:57:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time, eanderson@carolina.rr.com writes:
Ed;
I agree with what you posted, however I think you misread what I seek in my plane:


I seek good short field performance, and a substantial climb rate. After that I seek a strong cruise for 1 to 2 hours in the 7,000 to 12,000 ft zone followed by rapid decent without regard to shock cooling.


I accept the limitations inherent in my design. I will have to limit boost during take off, and hopefully retain about 200 HP at about 12,000 ft. As I said, I'm only looking for a modest power boost at the upper RPM range (where the propeller load is greatest) and to stay within the design limits of the airframe and the reduction gear.
Later, I may change anything. For now, this is my attainable goal....I just need to keep working on it until it flies....and beyond.
Scott



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3267 (20080714) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster