X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail-iy0-f180.google.com ([209.85.210.180] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.4) with ESMTPS id 5447129 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 20:46:43 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.210.180; envelope-from=keltro@gmail.com Received: by iage36 with SMTP id e36so10032692iag.25 for ; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 17:46:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=YUt6mKn+hvQAhai3DLlmyGk5epDS0e+wLAvpTrk87og=; b=GC/k4vYk2XQY9hfn6mxDKqQORwyObCljj8ZjtOj+/QrIPNsUiGo8taBZsl682BRo6u od8d04/6RpcfT98oyN+scc0fyT03+goXi9r0uyI7E03Zrh5IPl2x43qR7i7qgTBb77+j ZazNE7ctrtNrlPsW0A2PO+7DZDK5Ge2fzR7B4TQ+g1sNeodVSxI0+BTHbxWKvh2sscEE E+JBSXxLlNxGwYrWQdnOoqHB0bCBV4LqpKHm7whSfVuiCKL+N/jGQc5UUiMyPhP00LyN sJCgQuFYWI1rIa+5Nftc/a5RUb6U+buxXBM+DWqgaxupzxXF0WSrEgCnBnHfhi7pdrBg ywsA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.136.10 with SMTP id pw10mr11089802obb.73.1332117967148; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 17:46:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.60.165.67 with HTTP; Sun, 18 Mar 2012 17:46:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 19:46:07 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo charger setup From: Kelly Troyer To: Rotary motors in aircraft Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f64697f3b17a904bb8de27c --e89a8f64697f3b17a904bb8de27c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 4:59 PM, William Wilson wrote: > You always want the highest A/R you can get. The charts and quotes for > street use are intermittent power, and in an aircraft you need continuous > power. Lower A/R makes the turbo not only spin up faster but also makes it > less efficient, which means more heat dumped into the intake air, more > thermal stress on the turbo and less margin against ignition-related > bummers. > > The charts are also intended for sea level use. Turbos work harder at > high altitude. At 14,000 feet, your turbo is working twice as hard as it > would be at sea level to produce the same HP. > > The main benefit of a lower A/R is faster spooling time. Almost > irrelevant in an aircraft. High A/R has major benefits. > > > On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 2:11 PM, wrote: > >> Kelly; >> I'm on the Turbonetics chart to size a turbo to an engine application. >> It's a matrix chart, which shows To4E-50 STG V .63 A/R as feeding a 4.5 >> liter engine 10 psi boost and giving 350 HP. >> My TO4 60-1 P trim @ .81 A/R would be for a 5.0 liter 10 psi boost and >> 450-500 HP. >> Yet I followed the salesman's advise for fitting. What is it about a >> rotary? >> I checked the RX-7 site, 60-1 is a common enough application, albeit with >> a tighter A/R housing for street driving. >> When I check the compressor map, I seem to be operating in the lower left >> hand corner, low turbine RPM, and not far from the surge line based on >> estimated airflow and pressure ratio. >> I'm thinking that the exhaust blast of a rotary is much stronger, due to >> the port being wide open, where a piston engine has a poppet valve >> throttling the exhaust blast. Perhaps the high exhaust temp coupled with >> the high energy exhaust blast requires a bigger turbine to let it out in >> pulsations rather than pressurized flow? >> I think the Q trim turbine wheel is the 68mm that you have, the P trim >> that I have is the smaller 65mm. These measurements being the outside >> diameter of smaller exducer part of the turbine wheel. >> So it would seem to me that your turbine is larger than mine, offering >> less restriction to exaust flow, also with a 'looser' A/R turbine housing >> which additionally lets exhaust thru with less restriction. >> Add to that, your 50 series compressor is smaller than my 60-1 >> compressor, and pulls less of a load on the turbine. >> Very interesting. You may get a lower pressure ratio, exhaust pressure : >> intake pressure. Less exhaust back pressure for the boost you get. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Kelly Troyer >> To: Rotary motors in aircraft >> Sent: Sun, Mar 18, 2012 8:10 am >> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo charger setup >> >> My Turbonetics TO4E-50 has the F1-65 turbine wheel but I chose the >> really loose 1.15 a/r housing to avoid compressor >> surge and over speed at hoped for relatively high altitude >> cruising............. >> >> Kelly Troyer >> >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Ed Anderson wrote: >> >>> ** >>> I understand, some decisions have to be made before you know all the >>> factors. An a/r of 0.81 may work fine, just wanted to caution you if it >>> was 0.69 as I truly believe that is a bit on the small size for aircraft >>> application - particularly if you do not have any active boost control. >>> >>> Ed >>> >>> *From:* shipchief@aol.com >>> *Sent:* Saturday, March 17, 2012 10:14 PM >>> *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft >>> *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo charger setup >>> >>> Ed; >>> While you were answering my post, I was on the Turbonetics site, trying >>> to recall what was in my 60-1 turbo. >>> I have the 'on center' housing, due to not knowing which way I was going >>> to face the turbo at the time. This sets the possible A/R choices. The >>> turbinescome in 2 sizes, F1-62 & F1-65. >>> Of those, the on-center housings' A/R start @ .58, .69, .81 That's it >>> for the F1-62 wheel. >>> The F1-65 wheel continues on to .96 and 1.30. >>> I mistankenly said in the last post that the A/R is .61. I'm >>> thinking it's actaully .81, the loosest choice for the F1-62 wheel, and the >>> median choice if I have the F1-65 wheel. >>> Now I need to check. >>> I want to set up loose for first flights. I didn't know much about >>> sizing a turbo when I bought this one, so I called and had the saleman set >>> me up for a 13b turbo jetboat to be run at high altitude lakes with a tight >>> engine cover.... >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Ed Anderson >>> To: Rotary motors in aircraft >>> Sent: Sat, Mar 17, 2012 6:41 pm >>> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo charger setup >>> >>> I would be hesitant to fly with a 0.68 a/r ratio turbine housing. A >>> small a/r gives you tremendous (and rapid) boost - that "kick in the seat" >>> sports car feel. However, at high rpm/power settings several things occur >>> if no way of controlling the boost. >>> >>> 1. The small a/r will tend to overspeed the turbine - especially at >>> altitude and can lead to surging. >>> 2. The small a/r will produce a large amount of backpressure and heat >>> from the turbine housing back to the engine - and add to your heat load >>> - simply because it can not escape as readily as with an larger a/r. >>> 3. The boost pressure may well exceed what your system is designed for >>> 4. You will not produce as much HP at the higher rpm because the >>> overall air mass flow will be less. >>> >>> Most have found that if using an uncontrolled turbocharger that an a/r >>> around 1.0 produces better and safer results. With a Turbonetics 60--1, >>> you should have no problem acquiring a turbine housing closer to 1.0 >>> >>> There are several good books around on turbocharger and a/r selection - >>> might want to browse through a few. >>> >>> Good luck >>> >>> Ed >>> >>> *From:* shipchief@aol.com >>> *Sent:* Saturday, March 17, 2012 6:58 PM >>> *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft >>> *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo charger setup >>> >>> Looks like March 7 was a busy day for this forum! >>> I'm ground running my RV-8 at the airport now. I even did a TAXI TEST to >>> the end of the runway and back. >>> I have a Turbo 13b, with a Turbonetics 60-1. I'm at work now, so I can't >>> give the particulars on the turbo, but someone on this forum told me that >>> my exhaust housing is pretty tight for not having an intercooler, wastegate >>> or blow off valve. (.61 A/R??) >>> Last week I ran the engine up while the aircraft was tied down as I have >>> done in the past. But now that I have wings and brakes etc, and at the >>> airport, I've been increasing the power output. >>> I did briefly get a boost reading of 44 " Hg, at about 5000RPM. The oil >>> temp was climbing fast as Len says. I pulled back @ 200F, but it went for a >>> few seconds to 206 before it came down. Good thing the oil and water cool >>> well at lower settings. >>> I'm thinking aboout your comments on using excess boost air to operate >>> auxilliary equipment. >>> I don't think you can do that in a practical way due to weight and space >>> constraints in the 'engine room'. >>> I can barely fit all my 13b turbo stuff inside an RV-8 cowl, and I don't >>> have the nose gear version. >>> I could eventually fit a remote wastegate, and an intercooler if needed, >>> but servicing the engine would be difficult, as I would have to remove some >>> layers to get to the core engine. >>> Remember, "Add lightness and simplicate" !! >>> I think I'm getting good power. The CATTO 2 blade prop is a left hand >>> turnig version of his standard for O-360 Lycoming 180 HP engines. I got it >>> up to 2280 RPM static. That seems up to 200 RPM higher that RV's are >>> getting. I just don't know if I can do that for any sustained length of >>> time. >>> I worry about high inlet air temp,and oil temp too. >>> The engine seems to respond well to throttle command while taxi, so as >>> soon as I get some more wires pulled and the wing tips on, I could try some >>> faster taxi tests... >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Mark McClure >>> To: Rotary motors in aircraft >>> Sent: Wed, Mar 7, 2012 9:04 pm >>> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo charger setup >>> >>> I am planning on using the turbine of a turbo to spin a generator. I want the >>> muffler action. I don't want the added weight/drag of the "Turbo setup" which >>> can be quite large when factoring in all the components. >>> >>> I plan to do most of my flying below 10k so it doesn't make sense to have the >>> boosted air. On the other hand - having electronic engine control and electronic >>> flying instruments electricity is becoming increasing important to me at all >>> flight regimes. >>> >>> What I fly for a living has a similar electrical demand - so there are two >>> primary generators and a third powered off an APU, just in case. But those only >>> provide electricity to the instruments and mission equipment. The engines have >>> small alternators on them for providing primary power to the engine control >>> units. Redundancy is the name of the game. >>> >>> So my plan right now is to have an alternator providing power to the EC3 and >>> EM3. and then a generator providing power to the glass cockpit and avionics. of >>> course the two will be redundant to each other. >>> >>> Then for full redundancy - the glass cockpit has their own backup battery and >>> the airframe battery provides backup for the engine control and monitoring. >>> >>> I am still very early in the process though - but I believe there is a lot of >>> energy to harness out of the exhaust of the rotary. But as you mentioned there >>> is something to be said for the muffler action being harnessed for something >>> useful. >>> >>> Your plan though seems to work in theory - I would probably use that as a Turbo >>> Normalized setup though. >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> On Mar 7, 2012, at 6:26 PM, Ernest Christley wrote: >>> >>> > On 03/07/2012 06:51 PM, Patrick wrote: >>> >> I'm planning to use a turbo on a 20B, primarily as a muffler, but would like >>> to set it for 3-5 psi boost. >>> >> A lot of current techniques are based on street car experience, which are not >>> always directly applicable to airplanes, ie. no need for rapid throttle response >>> (usually) and run at high % power continuously. >>> >> >>> >> I'm thinking of a setup modeling refrigeration techniques: >>> >> >>> >> * Run all exhaust through turbo, no waste-gate, larger A/R >>> >> * Compress higher than needed, which makes air very hot >>> >> * Run through intercooler, which is more efficient with higher temp delta >>> >> * Allow to expand using larger pipe and blow-off valve to regulate >>> >> pressure before intake >>> >> >>> >> The result "should be" cooler intake air at a slight boost. >>> >> >>> >> What am I missing? >>> >> >>> > The energy cost of compressing all that air and then throwing it away? >>> Though, like Tracy has said, pressurized air is hard to get on an airplane. It >>> wouldn't be so bad if you could use it for something. The two things that >>> spring to my mind are: >>> > 1) engine cooling: blow it through a radiator. The drawback is that you'll >>> want more boost on climbout, and that is when you'd want the extra air through >>> the radiator. >>> > 2) exhaust cooling/thrust: push the extra cool air into/around the exhaust. >>> As I understand it, rotary mufflers die quickly because of a combination of heat >>> and sonic pounding. Cooling it will reduce both, and if there might be a slight >>> amount of thrust available if everything is set up just right. >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >>> >>> > Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >>> Archive and UnSub: http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Kelly Troyer >> Dyke Delta_"Eventually" >> 13B_RD1C_EC2_EM2 >> > > -- Kelly Troyer Dyke Delta_"Eventually" 13B_RD1C_EC2_EM2 --e89a8f64697f3b17a904bb8de27c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 4:59 PM, William Wilson = <fluffysheap@gmail.com> wrote:
You always want the highest A/R you c= an get.=A0 The charts and quotes for street use are intermittent power, and= in an aircraft you need continuous power.=A0 Lower A/R makes the turbo not= only spin up faster but also makes it less efficient, which means more hea= t dumped into the intake air, more thermal stress on the turbo and less mar= gin against ignition-related bummers.

The charts are also intended for sea level use.=A0 Turbos work harder a= t high altitude.=A0 At 14,000 feet, your turbo is working twice as hard as = it would be at sea level to produce the same HP.

The main benefit of= a lower A/R is faster spooling time.=A0 Almost irrelevant in an aircraft.= =A0 High A/R has major benefits.=20


On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 2:11 PM, <shipchief@aol= .com> wrote:
Kelly;
I'm on the Turbonetics chart to size a turbo to an engine applicat= ion. It's a matrix chart, which shows To4E-50 STG V .63 A/R as feeding = a 4.5 liter engine 10 psi boost and giving 350 HP.
My TO4 60-1 P trim @ .81 A/R would be for a 5.0 liter 10 psi boost and= 450-500 HP.
Yet I followed the salesman's advise for fitting. What is it about= a rotary?
I checked the RX-7 site, 60-1 is a common enough application, albeit w= ith a tighter A/R housing for street driving.
When I check the compressor map, I seem to be operating in the lower l= eft hand corner, low turbine RPM, and not far from the surge line based on = estimated airflow and pressure ratio.
I'm thinking that the exhaust blast of a rotary is much stronger, = due to the port being wide open, where a piston engine has a poppet valve t= hrottling the exhaust blast.=A0Perhaps the high exhaust temp coupled with t= he high energy exhaust blast requires a bigger turbine to let it out in pul= sations rather than pressurized flow?
I think the Q trim turbine wheel is the 68mm that you have, the P trim= that I have is the smaller 65mm. These measurements being the outside diam= eter of smaller exducer part of the turbine wheel.
So it would seem to me that your turbine is larger than mine, offering= less restriction to exaust flow, also with a 'looser' A/R turbine = housing which additionally lets exhaust thru with less restriction.
Add to that, your 50 series compressor is smaller than my 60-1 compres= sor, and pulls less of a load on the turbine.
Very interesting. You may get a=A0lower pressure ratio, exhaust pressu= re : intake pressure. Less exhaust back pressure for the boost you get.
=

-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly Troyer <keltro@gmail.com>
To: Rotary= motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sun, Mar 18, 2012 8:10 am
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo char= ger setup

=A0 My Turbonetics TO4E-50 has the F1-65 turbine wheel but I chose the= really loose 1.15 a/r housing to avoid compressor
=A0surge and over speed at hoped for relatively high=A0altitude cruisi= ng.............
=A0
Kelly Troyer
=A0
=A0
=A0
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com> wrote:
I understand, some decisions have to be made befo= re you know all the factors.=A0 An a/r of 0.81 may work fine, just wanted t= o caution you if it was 0.69 as I truly believe that is a bit on the small = size for aircraft application - particularly if you do not have any active = boost control.
=A0
Ed

Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 10:14 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo charger setup
<= /div>

Ed;
While you were answering my post, I was on the Turbonetics site, tryin= g to recall what was in my 60-1 turbo.
I have the 'on center' housing, due to not knowing which way I= was going to face the turbo at the time. This sets the possible A/R choice= s. The turbinescome in 2 sizes,=A0F1-62 & F1-65.
Of those, the on-center housings' A/R start @ .58, .69, .81 That&#= 39;s it for the F1-62 wheel.
The F1-65 wheel continues on to .96 and 1.30.
I mistankenly said in the last post that the A/R is .61. I'm think= ing=A0it's actaully .81, the loosest choice for the F1-62 wheel, and th= e median choice if I have the F1-65 wheel.
Now I need to check.
I want to set up loose for first flights. I didn't know much about= sizing a turbo when I bought this one, so I called and had the saleman set= me up for a 13b turbo jetboat to be run at high altitude lakes with a tigh= t engine cover....=A0


-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com&= gt;
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Sat, Mar 17, 2012 6:41 pm
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo char= ger setup

I would be hesitant to fly with a 0.68 a/r ratio = turbine housing.=A0 A small a/r gives you tremendous (and rapid) boost - th= at "kick in the seat" sports car feel.=A0 However, at high rpm/po= wer settings several things occur if no way of controlling the boost.
=A0
1.=A0 The small a/r will tend to overspeed the tu= rbine - especially at altitude and can lead to surging.
2.=A0 The small a/r will produce a large amount o= f backpressure and heat from the turbine housing back to the engine - and a= dd to your heat load -=A0simply because it can not escape as readily as wit= h an larger a/r.
3.=A0 The boost pressure may well exceed what you= r system is designed for
4.=A0 You will not produce as much HP at the high= er rpm because the overall air mass flow will be less.
=A0
Most have found that if using an uncontrolled tur= bocharger that an a/r=A0 around 1.0 produces better and safer results.=A0 W= ith a Turbonetics 60--1, you should have no problem acquiring a turbine hou= sing closer to 1.0
=A0
There are several good books around on turbocharg= er and a/r selection - might want to browse through a few.
=A0
Good luck
=A0
Ed

Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2012 6:58 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo charger setup
<= /div>

Looks like March 7 was a busy day for this forum!
I'm ground running my RV-8 at the airport now. I even did a TAXI T= EST to the end of the runway and back.
I have a Turbo 13b, with a Turbonetics 60-1. I'm at work now, so I= can't give the particulars on the turbo, but someone on this forum tol= d me that my exhaust housing is pretty tight for not having an intercooler,= wastegate or blow off valve. (.61 A/R??)
Last week I ran the engine up while the aircraft was tied=A0down as I = have done in the past. But now that I have wings and brakes etc, and at the= airport, I've been increasing the power output.
I did briefly get a boost reading of 44 " Hg, at about 5000RPM.= =A0The oil temp was climbing fast as Len says. I pulled back @ 200F, but it= went for a few seconds to 206 before it came down. Good thing the oil and = water cool well at lower settings.
I'm thinking aboout your comments on using excess boost air to ope= rate auxilliary equipment.
I don't think you can do that in a practical way due to weight and= space constraints in the 'engine room'.
I can barely fit all my 13b turbo stuff inside an RV-8 cowl, and I don= 't have the nose gear version.
I could eventually fit a remote wastegate, and an intercooler if neede= d, but servicing the engine would be difficult, as I would have to remove s= ome layers to get to the core engine.
Remember, "Add lightness and simplicate" !!
I think I'm getting good power. The CATTO 2 blade prop is a left h= and turnig version of his standard for O-360 Lycoming 180 HP engines. I got= it up to 2280 RPM static. That seems=A0up to=A0200 RPM higher that RV'= s are getting. I just don't know if I can do that for any sustained len= gth of time.
I worry about high inlet air temp,and oil temp too.
The engine seems to respond well to throttle command while taxi, so as= soon as I get some more wires pulled and the wing tips on, I could try som= e faster taxi tests...


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark McClure <markmcclure@me.com>
To: Ro= tary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Wed, Mar 7, 2012 9:04 pm
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo charger se= tup

I am planning on using the turbi=
ne of a turbo to spin a generator. I want the=20
muffler action. I don't want the added weight/drag of the "Turbo s=
etup" which=20
can be quite large when factoring in all the components.=20

I plan to do most of my flying below 10k so it doesn't make sense to ha=
ve the=20
boosted air. On the other hand - having electronic engine control and elect=
ronic=20
flying instruments electricity is becoming increasing important to me at al=
l=20
flight regimes.

What I fly for a living has a similar electrical demand - so there are two=
=20
primary generators and a third powered off an APU, just in case. But those =
only=20
provide electricity to the instruments and mission equipment. The engines h=
ave=20
small alternators on them for providing primary power to the engine control=
=20
units. Redundancy is the name of the game.

So my plan right now is to have an alternator providing power to the EC3 an=
d=20
EM3. and then a generator providing power to the glass cockpit and avionics=
. of=20
course the two will be redundant to each other.=20

Then for full redundancy - the glass cockpit has their own backup battery a=
nd=20
the airframe battery provides backup for the engine control and monitoring.=
=20

I am still very early in the process though - but I believe there is a lot =
of=20
energy to harness out of the exhaust of the rotary. But as you mentioned th=
ere=20
is something to be said for the muffler action being harnessed for somethin=
g=20
useful.

 Your plan though seems to work in theory - I would probably use that as a =
Turbo=20
Normalized setup though.

Mark


On Mar 7, 2012, at 6:26 PM, Ernest Christley wrote:

> On 03/07/2012 06:51 PM, Patrick wrote:
>> I'm planning to use a turbo on a 20B, primarily as a muffler, =
but would like=20
to set it for 3-5 psi boost.
>> A lot of current techniques are based on street car experience, wh=
ich are not=20
always directly applicable to airplanes, ie. no need for rapid throttle res=
ponse=20
(usually) and run at high % power continuously.
>>=20
>> I'm thinking of a setup modeling refrigeration techniques:
>>=20
>> * Run all exhaust through turbo, no waste-gate, larger A/R
>> * Compress higher than needed, which makes air very hot
>> * Run through intercooler, which is more efficient with higher tem=
p delta
>> * Allow to expand using larger pipe and blow-off valve to regulate
>>   pressure before intake
>>=20
>> The result "should be" cooler intake air at a slight boo=
st.
>>=20
>> What am I missing?
>>=20
> The energy cost of compressing all that air and then throwing it away?=
 =20
Though,  like Tracy has said, pressurized air is hard to get on an airplane=
.  It=20
wouldn't be so bad if you could use it for something.  The two things t=
hat=20
spring to my mind are:
> 1) engine cooling: blow it through a radiator.  The drawback is that y=
ou'll=20
want more boost on climbout, and that is when you'd want the extra air =
through=20
the radiator.
> 2) exhaust cooling/thrust: push the extra cool air into/around the exh=
aust. =20
As I understand it, rotary mufflers die quickly because of a combination of=
 heat=20
and sonic pounding.  Cooling it will reduce both, and if there might be a s=
light=20
amount of thrust available if everything is set up just right.
>=20
> --
> Homepage:  htt=
p://www.flyrotary.com/



--
Kelly Troyer
Dyke Delta_&qu= ot;Eventually"
13B_RD1C_EC2_EM2
<= /blockquote>




--
K= elly Troyer
Dyke Delta_"Eventually"
13B_RD1C_EC2_EM2
--e89a8f64697f3b17a904bb8de27c--