X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [64.129.170.194] (HELO VIRCOM1.fcdata.private) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.3) with ESMTP id 5360487 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 22 Jan 2012 22:57:49 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.129.170.194; envelope-from=cbarber@texasattorney.net Received: from FCD-MAIL06.FCDATA.PRIVATE (unverified [172.16.5.23]) by VIRCOM1.fcdata.private (Vircom SMTPRS 5.1.1024.13396) with ESMTP id for ; Sun, 22 Jan 2012 21:56:37 -0600 X-Modus-BlackList: 172.16.5.23=OK;cbarber@texasattorney.net=OK X-Modus-RBL: 172.16.5.23=Excluded X-Modus-Trusted: 172.16.5.23=NO X-Modus-Audit: FALSE;0;0;0 Received: from FCD-MAIL05.FCDATA.PRIVATE ([fe80::809d:a06e:5913:452e]) by FCD-MAIL06.FCDATA.PRIVATE ([fe80::697f:d6aa:b87:78d8%17]) with mapi id 14.01.0355.002; Sun, 22 Jan 2012 21:57:15 -0600 From: Chris Barber To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Top 7 reasons for using an auto conversion Thread-Topic: [FlyRotary] Re: Top 7 reasons for using an auto conversion Thread-Index: AQHM2XE4OTPKi+ydwk6pYfRbPwskFpYZS2Ry Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 03:57:12 +0000 Message-ID: <2D41F9BF3B5F9842B164AF93214F3D30DB550078@FCD-MAIL05.FCDATA.PRIVATE> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [99.98.105.202] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2D41F9BF3B5F9842B164AF93214F3D30DB550078FCDMAIL05FCDATA_" MIME-Version: 1.0 --_000_2D41F9BF3B5F9842B164AF93214F3D30DB550078FCDMAIL05FCDATA_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I disagree with you guys that diminish the cost benefit. I know it is popu= lar to assume that because it is cheaper it may be inferior, but what I see= m to see in the aviation market is that expensive does not necessarily tran= sfer into automatic savings or safety. Expensive, pedigreed crank shafts f= ail. If dollars transferred to reliable or safety, that would not happen. = I know we do not want to appear cavalier, but this "oh, I would never take= the cheaper route cuz it must be the more dangerous route" gets old. It i= s a red hearing and is just not borne out, in my arrogant opinion. Mindful= evaluation is called for. I know, now we will all jump on and say of course, we know that but it is a= n argument so overused it makes my eyes role. Yes, COST is a major factor.= If I can build as good or better then good on me. It is like the urban l= egend of all the money NASA spent to develop a pen that would write in spac= e....the Russians....well, they used a pencil. (I think Snopes debunked th= is even though it is a great story). I don't mind using the pencil....even= though a pen that writes upside down is kinda kewl (yes, I am dating mysel= f a bit with this reference....) If you postpone replacing your plugs because they are $60 each or you just = buy a new set each year for your rotary at less than that for a full premiu= m set, that may be a false economy. How many certified engines are flying = well past their 2000 hrs? It is my understanding, a lot. Why, cost prohi= bitive to replace/rebuild? Or, maybe, it is just the if its not broke don'= t fix it. Who knows? We seem embarrassed to acknowledge that price matters. If I can get an as = good or better product for much less I should not be embarrassed to do so, = I should herald it from the longest runway. I should be embarrassed to pay = more for the same thing. While I have enjoyed the build I would also likely= love a Cessna Corvallis. The reality is, on either my cop salary or my la= wyer income I could not afford it. My build gives me entertainment and sat= isfaction. That, my friends, is bang for the buck. When I read "when cost is a major reason, I get nervous" I ask why. Expens= ive professionals built the Titanic, Armatures built the ark. We are by na= ture those that are willing to step up and try to build a better mousetrap.= ...why not be proud that we can do so at a fraction of the cost and still o= utperform those expensive lesser brands. Harbor Freight is a good example= . For things that are not life dependant and if I am not making my living = with the tools, are great for my use. Yes, I have bragging rights if I hav= e a complete set of Snap-on, or Craftsman or whatever, but the HF wrench wo= rked just as well for the purpose intended. NO, I would not likely want to= use a HF part to hold on my wing, but to turn the screw on the nav light o= n the end of that wing, no problem. Another example of this not directly related to the engine is my Dynon Skyv= iew. It is far superior, from what I can see, than the most expensive, and= now outdated, steam guages even though many still wish to swear by steam g= auges, not to mentions the glass cockpits of the airlines that likely cost = in the hudred of thousands of dollars just a few years ago. More power to = them. I relish the fact I have options If it were not for the bang for the buck, I would not be able to be involve= d to this degree with my passion for homebuilt aviation........cost matters= and I am not ashamed to say so. Going is cheaper does not mean going inferior as long as you are mindful ab= out your decision. I hope to zoom zoom zoom past the boing bangers very so= on.....hopefully with a big Rotary knowing smile. Flame suit on. Chris Barber ________________________________ From: Rotary motors in aircraft [flyrotary@lancaironline.net] on behalf of = Terry Adams [terrywadams@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 7:48 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Top 7 reasons for using an auto conversion In that I had built the airplane I was also intrigued with converting an au= to engine for flight. The performance/reliability of the Mazda rotary look= ed good, the cost to install, maintain, and overhaul also looked good. Wha= t I experienced is that the total cost was very close to installing a mid-t= ime "1930s tractor engine". However, the length of time for me to convert/= install/plumb/duct/wire/cowl/test/etc the rotary was enormous. The satisfa= ction of all the pieces working together while the prop was lazily whirling= at 300 rpm, just priceless. Terry KSCK On 1/22/2012 11:18 AM, Patrick Panzera wrote: Friends, I've recently been asked what are the top 7 reasons for using an auto conversion. I answered with mine, but I'd like to hear (read) yours. Thanks! Pat -- Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.= html --_000_2D41F9BF3B5F9842B164AF93214F3D30DB550078FCDMAIL05FCDATA_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I disagree with you guys that diminish the cost benefit.  I know it= is popular to assume that because it is cheaper it may be inferior, but wh= at I seem to see in the aviation market is that expensive does not&nbs= p;necessarily transfer into automatic savings or safety.  Expensive, pedigreed crank shafts fail.  If dollars = transferred to reliable or safety, that would not happen.  I know we d= o not want to appear cavalier, but this "oh, I would never take the ch= eaper route cuz it must be the more dangerous route" gets old.  It is a red hearing and is just not borne= out, in my arrogant opinion.  Mindful evaluation is called for= . 

 

I know, now we will all jump on and say of course, we know that but it i= s an argument so overused it makes my eyes role.  Yes, COS= T is a major factor.  If I can build as good or better then good on me= .  It is like the urban legend of all the money NASA spent to develop a pen that would write in space....the Russians....well, they used a pencil.  (I think Snopes de= bunked this even though it is a great story).  I don't mind using the = pencil....even though a pen that writes upside down is kinda kewl (yes, I am dating= myself a bit with this reference....)

 

If you postpone replacing your plugs because they are $60 each or you ju= st buy a new set each year for your rotary at less than that for a full pre= mium set, that may be a false economy.  How many certified engines are= flying well past their 2000 hrs?  It is my understanding, a lot.   Why, cost prohibitive to replace/r= ebuild?  Or, maybe, it is just the if its not broke don't fix it. = ; Who knows?

 

We seem embarrassed to acknowledge that price matters.  If I can ge= t an as good or better product for much less I should not be embarrassed to= do so, I should herald it from the longest runway. I should be embarr= assed to pay more for the same thing. While I have enjoyed the build I would also likely love a Cessna Cor= vallis.  The reality is, on either my cop salary or my lawyer i= ncome I could not afford it.  My build gives me entertainment and sati= sfaction.  That, my friends, is bang for the buck.

 

When I read "when cost is a major reason, I get nervous" I ask= why.  Expensive professionals built the Titanic, Armature= s built the ark.  We are by nature those that are willing to st= ep up and try to build a better mousetrap....why not be proud that we can do so at a fraction of the cost and still outperform those exp= ensive lesser brands.   Harbor Freight is= a good example.  For things that are not life dependant and if I am n= ot making my living with the tools, are great for my use.  Yes, I have bragging rights if I have a complete s= et of Snap-on, or Craftsman or whatever, but the HF wren= ch worked just as well for the purpose intended.  NO, I would not like= ly want to use a HF part to hold on my wing, but to turn the screw on the nav light on the end= of that wing, no problem.

 

Another example of this not directly related to the engine is my Dy= non Skyview.  It is far superior, from what I can see, t= han the most expensive, and now outdated, steam guages even tho= ugh many still wish to swear by steam gauges, not to mentions the glass cockpits of the airlines that likely cost in the&nbs= p;hudred of thousands of dollars just a few years ago.  More po= wer to them.  I relish the fact I have options

 

If it were not for the bang for the buck, I would not be able to be invo= lved to this degree with my passion for homebuilt aviation.....= ...cost matters and I am not ashamed to say so.

 

Going is cheaper does not mean going inferior as long as you are mindful= about your decision.  I hope to zoom zoom zoom past the boing bangers very soon.....hopefully with a big Rot= ary knowing smile.

 

Flame suit on.

 

Chris Barber

From: Rotary motors in aircraft [flyrotary= @lancaironline.net] on behalf of Terry Adams [terrywadams@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2012 7:48 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Top 7 reasons for using an auto conversion<= br>

In that I had built the airplane I was also intrigued with converting an au= to engine for flight.  The performance/reliability of the Mazda rotary= looked good, the cost to install, maintain, and overhaul also looked good.=   What I experienced is that the total cost was very close to installing a = mid-time "1930s tractor engine".  However, the length of tim= e for me to convert/install/plumb/duct/wire/cowl/test/etc the rotary w= as enormous.  The satisfaction of all the pieces working together whil= e the prop was lazily whirling at 300 rpm, just priceless.

Terry
KSCK


On 1/22/2012 11:18 AM, Patrick Panzera wrote: 
Friends,

I've recently been asked what are the top 7 reasons for using an auto
conversion.
I answered with mine, but I'd like to hear (read) yours.

Thanks!

Pat

--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:   http://m=
ail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
--_000_2D41F9BF3B5F9842B164AF93214F3D30DB550078FCDMAIL05FCDATA_--