X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com From: Received: from omr-m010e.mx.aol.com ([204.29.186.10] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.1.10) with ESMTPS id 8712731 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 08 Jun 2016 01:58:11 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=204.29.186.10; envelope-from=argoldman@aol.com Received: from mtaomg-mad02.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-mad02.mx.aol.com [172.26.221.208]) by omr-m010e.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 1B63B380009E for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 01:57:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from core-abc05c.mail.aol.com (core-abc05.mail.aol.com [172.27.9.15]) by mtaomg-mad02.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id CB08B38000085 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2016 01:57:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 67.167.230.135 by webprd-m19.mail.aol.com (10.74.15.139) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Wed, 08 Jun 2016 01:57:53 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 01:57:53 -0400 To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message-Id: <1552e96a92f-1288-8192@webprd-m19.mail.aol.com> In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: What a load!! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_34528_1232112393.1465365473581" X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: JAS STD X-Originating-IP: [67.167.230.135] x-aol-global-disposition: G DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20150623; t=1465365474; bh=YLyDWh8DBk567jNE3BGrWKE+JCYSHaNZhOUZ+vManlU=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=CjkMEP6ETVdTeM5pkevSid57Mf8vnqAE3aq2VL9S1mfGoQFacmOTzt24+UwvsK5DZ weeo/LK9uBKYkZonD7v2MRs3/+wAOtBgvQi9ESbThCjo+1WK60Jj2Sp1hBTZbvpmb5 4YX3yppQEXeZcpUWIxhFjjZuuU9tg8zAN6fvcOhg= x-aol-sid: 3039ac1addd05757b3e13777 ------=_Part_34528_1232112393.1465365473581 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I donnknow, I have lots of mixed feelings about this article. Yes it is an important article and reveals lots of problems, and yes we should welcome him into the community, however Where is his responsibility to learn all he could about his "strange engine" with a "strange" gear box,a "strange" ignition system that may or may not have been modified in a strange way. There are many resources available to learn prior to turning a wrench. As an example, It seems like he has a Ross gear box but is lubricating it as if it were an RWS, thus the blown seal. Articles, such as this, although interesting to those of us with some knowledge of the engine, I believe are detrimental to those people who what to rotarize. It really said-- "Don't go there, the damn things don't work and will cost you a fortune. Hopefully the author will get the necessary education before going any further. If he continues, as he is going, if the engine ever does produce power, he has a great possibility of becoming a statistic which can only hurt our effort to eliminate cylinders. Perhaps the article should be entitled," Learn before you leap". The time, IMNSHO to write an article of this type is after the engine has been successful and should be written as a retrospective of the journey. Rich -----Original Message----- From: Lehanover To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Tue, Jun 7, 2016 11:06 pm Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: What a load!! Good or bad there is great value in airing all problems and cures. If we learn from the mistakes of others the cost goes down. Remove the plugs. Disable the ignition system. Clear the prop. Spin up oil pressure several times so as to get all of the air out of the oil passages and hoses. Before you start the engine the first time from new, and after a long winter or period if no use. If the pump has drained down to dry and will not prime. Disconnect the pressure out hose form its destination and stick the loose end in the shop vac with a shop rag as a seal. Apply a vacuum and crank the engine until you make a mess in the shop vac. Now spin up some oil into a waste can to be sure pump is OK. Then reattach the hose and spin up oil pressure. Piece of cake. Lynn E. Hanover In a message dated 6/7/2016 9:30:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, flyrotary@lancaironline.net writes: Hi Andrew Excellent to hear of another rotary in Aus getting airborne, excellent work, Bumma about the rebuild, but that's the learning curve, is worth the perseverance . Well done As for the article, I reckon it was well done and a good collection of mistakes that some of us has made Over the years, yes it can be taken both ways, but wherever my rotary flies to there is always a fair amount of enthusiasm associated around the engine. Cheers all On Wednesday, 8 June 2016, Andrew Martin wrote: I dont see a problem with the article, good on him for writing it, looks to me that he is perservering. Much same article could be written by many Lyc/Cont builds. Takes a lot to put your mistakes into print for others to learn. I think we should be inviting him to this forum and encouraging him on. If I was close I'd go and say hello but I dont think he lives near Western Australia. I myself made my maiden flight on Sunday. Total time 4 minuites, learnt that the plane handles exceponally well. Steam cleaned the inside of the cowl at 500' above the wrong end of the runway, all due to an absolutly stupid mistake by the builder, so a rebuild is in order before next flight. I might even tell more if I can bring myself to admitting my mistake in print and know that I wont be ridiculed. I really like my rotary engine, saved my ass. Cheers Andrew Martin Lightwing SP4000 Renesis,rd1-c,ec2,em2. gt electric cs prop. YGEL Western Australia On Wednesday, 8 June 2016, William Jepson wrote: True Todd, and I was rather harsh in my comment. I think that I am sensitive as I want rotary conversions to flourish. That article isn't helpful to that. Bill Jepson On Jun 7, 2016 4:07 PM, "Todd Bartrim" wrote: Oh, there's so many things that could be said about this article, but the most important is the next to final line.. "but I've had a lot more fun and learned a great deal more than simply bolting on another engine." That pretty much fits with the rule that allows us to build for "entertainment and educational purposes". While building my plane was fun, it wasn't hard with the very complete manual and plans that Vans supplies, but by far the most fun and rewarding aspect of the project was the FWF where all design and development was the responsibility of yours truly with the only guidance being provided by the collective wisdom of the members of this list. I don't recognize his name so I assume he was never a member of this list, but obviously a disciple of Lamar. While it does shed a negative light on what we are doing, it likely wouldn't dissuade a knowledgeable and competent builder, but will make those with questionable abilities think twice about embarking on this journey. When we trivialize the challenges that we've overcome, we do possibly create unrealistic expectations for others. Todd C-FSTB RV9 13Bturbo Todd Bartrim On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 2:13 PM, ARGOLDMAN wrote: And the re builder Rich In a message dated 6/7/2016 12:16:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, flyrotary@lancaironline.net writes: This single article does more to damage the reputation of the rotary engine, as well as auto conversions in general, than all the positive articles combined have done to promote the use. http://www.kitplanes.com/issues/31_9/builder_spotlight/building_rotary_engine_21069-1.html ...when in reality, it proves the incompetence of the builder. Pat -- Regards Andrew Martin Martin Ag ------=_Part_34528_1232112393.1465365473581 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I donnknow, I have lots of mixed feelings about this article.

Yes it is an important article and reveals lots of problems, and yes we should welcome him into the community,

 however

Where is his responsibility to learn all he could about his "strange engine" with a "strange" gear box,a "strange" ignition system that may or may not have been modified in a strange way.

There are many resources available to learn prior to turning a wrench. As an example, It seems like he has a Ross gear box but is lubricating it as if it were an RWS, thus the blown seal.

Articles, such as this, although interesting to those of us with some knowledge of the engine, I believe are detrimental to those people who what to rotarize. It really said-- "Don't go there, the damn things don't work and will cost you a fortune.

Hopefully the author will get the necessary education before going any further. If he continues, as he is going, if the engine ever does produce power, he has a great possibility of becoming a statistic which can only hurt our effort to eliminate cylinders.

Perhaps the article should be entitled," Learn before you leap".

The time, IMNSHO to write an article of this type is after the engine has been successful and should be written as a retrospective of the journey.

Rich



-----Original Message-----
From: Lehanover <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Tue, Jun 7, 2016 11:06 pm
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: What a load!!

Good or bad there is great value in airing all problems and cures. If we learn from the mistakes of others the cost goes down. Remove the plugs. Disable the ignition system. Clear the prop. Spin up oil pressure several times so as to get all of the air out of the oil passages and hoses. Before you start the engine the first time from new, and after a long winter or period if no use.
 
If the pump has drained down to dry and will not prime. Disconnect the pressure out hose form its destination and stick the loose end in the shop vac with a shop rag as a seal. Apply a vacuum and crank the engine until you make a mess in the shop vac. Now spin up some oil into a waste can to be sure pump is OK. Then reattach the hose and  spin up oil pressure. Piece of cake.
 
Lynn E. Hanover
 
In a message dated 6/7/2016 9:30:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, flyrotary@lancaironline.net writes:
Hi Andrew
Excellent to hear of another rotary in Aus getting airborne, excellent work, 
Bumma about the rebuild, but that's the learning curve, is worth the perseverance .
Well done
As for the article, I reckon it was well done and a good collection of mistakes that some of us has made Over the years, yes it can be taken both ways, but wherever my rotary flies to there is always a fair amount of enthusiasm associated around the engine.

Cheers all

On Wednesday, 8 June 2016, Andrew Martin <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:
I dont see a problem with the article, good on him for writing it, looks to me that he is perservering. Much same article could be written by many Lyc/Cont builds. Takes a lot to put your mistakes into print for others to learn.

I think we should be inviting him to this forum and encouraging him on. If I was close I'd go and say hello but I dont think he lives near Western Australia.

I myself made my maiden flight on Sunday. Total time 4 minuites, learnt that the plane handles exceponally well. Steam cleaned the inside of the cowl at 500' above the wrong end of the runway, all due to an absolutly stupid mistake by the builder, so a rebuild is in order before next flight.

I might even tell more if I can bring myself to admitting my mistake in print and know that I wont be ridiculed. I really like my rotary engine, saved my ass.

Cheers
Andrew Martin
Lightwing SP4000
Renesis,rd1-c,ec2,em2. gt electric cs prop.
YGEL Western Australia


On Wednesday, 8 June 2016, William Jepson <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:
True Todd, and I was rather harsh in my comment. I think that I am sensitive as I want rotary conversions to flourish. That article isn't helpful to that.
Bill Jepson
On Jun 7, 2016 4:07 PM, "Todd Bartrim" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:
Oh, there's so many things that could be said about this article, but the most important is the next to final line..   "but I've had a lot more fun and learned a great deal more than simply bolting on another engine." 
That pretty much fits with the rule that allows us to build for "entertainment and educational purposes".
While building my plane was fun, it wasn't hard with the very complete manual and plans that Vans supplies, but by far the most fun and rewarding aspect of the project was the FWF where all design and development was the responsibility of yours truly with the only guidance being provided by the collective wisdom of the members of this list.
   I don't recognize his name so I assume he was never a member of this list, but obviously a disciple of Lamar. While it does shed a negative light on what we are doing, it likely wouldn't dissuade a knowledgeable and competent builder, but will make those with questionable abilities think twice about embarking on this journey.
When we trivialize the challenges that we've overcome, we do possibly create unrealistic expectations for others.

Todd
C-FSTB
RV9 13Bturbo

Todd Bartrim

On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 2:13 PM, ARGOLDMAN <flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:
And the re builder
 
Rich
 
In a message dated 6/7/2016 12:16:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, flyrotary@lancaironline.net writes:
This single article does more to damage the reputation of the rotary engine, as well as auto conversions in general, than all the positive articles combined have done to promote the use. 

http://www.kitplanes.com/issues/31_9/builder_spotlight/building_rotary_engine_21069-1.html


...when in reality, it proves the incompetence of the builder.

Pat



--
Regards
Andrew Martin
Martin Ag
 ------=_Part_34528_1232112393.1465365473581--