Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #57365
From: <shipchief@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Top 7 reasons for using an auto conversion
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 23:31:43 -0500 (EST)
To: <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
I'm with John Slade, Terry and Chad.
My engine terrifies me. It runs great, but I built a whole bunch of parts that could fail in serious consequence. Some parts have been built more than once.
I don't think I'll have saved much money, and it certainly added years to the project. That is the price of quality, and I did build it the best I can.
Along the way, I began to realize the joy of 'design and build'.
That's priceless. Also, I'm the engine maunfacturer, according to the FAA, so I can repair, alter, etc. without form 337s.
However, I don't get the benefit of ADs due to my unique arrangements.
I like certified engines just fine. I don't hold much against them. I did this because of many of the reasons already given, but it's my creative expression, like writing a song or something.
I get a big kick out of poeple who take the time to look at it.  
-----Original Message-----
From: Chad Robinson <crobinson@medialantern.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sun, Jan 22, 2012 8:26 pm
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Top 7 reasons for using an auto conversion

On 1/22/2012 7:19 PM, John Slade wrote:
> 1. Innovation. I couldn't bring myself to pay $18k for a used 1930's 
> tractor engine. Builders need a cheap, viable alternative to being 
> ripped off and I wanted to help find one. $700 for a used 30 year old 
> carburetor? Geesh!
> 2. Power. I wanted more power for take-off, climb and cruise. Take-off 
> power is a safety factor. You're in the "Oh shit" zone (Where its too 
> late to land ahead and too early to  turn back) for much less time.
> 3. Cash-flow. I didn't have to shell out $18k all in one lump.
> 4. Vibration. Vibration is tiring for the pilot and destructive to the 
> systems.
> 5. Benign failure modes. If a Lyc fails internally it often does so 
> catastrophically. Rotaries tend to keep running, then die once they've 
> got you home.
> 6. Maintenance cost. If the engine blows up, while I glide toward the 
> nearest landing spot at least I wont be thinking "this is going to 
> cost me $18,000 to rebuild".
> 7. For the challenge and satisfaction of having done it.
My list is almost identical to this one, but I put #2 first (I mimicked 
John's setup and went with a turbo), #5 second, and combine #6 -> #3. My 
7th item is the ENORMOUS wealth of information available about this 
engine online, in forums, in PDF files, in the experts' heads, 
third-party (Tracy Crook) part suppliers, etc.

I went all the way and rebuilt my engine from scratch. It was very 
satisfying, and I now know every part inside it. That doesn't make me 
Lynn Hanover, but it does give me a sense of confidence that I wouldn't 
have had with another engine. For any reason that would be a 
heart-sinking and costly trip to the A&P with another engine - low 
compression, metal dust in the oil pan, white smoke on startup, etc. - I 
can rip the engine out and rebuild it in a good weekend. There is 
nothing that would make me drag my feet and say "maybe it will clear 
up." "Let's open it up and see what's going on" is an absolutely 
reasonable answer.

I am terrified of my engine. I would be terrified of any engine - I 
figure it's a good position for an experimental pilot to take. The 
rotary terrifies me the least.

Regards,
Chad


--
Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:   http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html
Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster