Lynn,
I'm sure the thing that stopped Mistral was the FAA paper trail requirements. All the parts need to be made in house, or be certified by their manufacturer. Since Mazda had no intention of certifying their parts the start up production cost would be huge. I'm sure the engine would pass the requirements easily, but that isn't enough for the FAA. The added parts cost is ridiculous. A friend has a Grumman American Tiger. It needed a wheel bearing. The aircraft part cost $107. The identical bearing with the same SKF part number RETAILS for $19 bucks, just no paperwork. Mistral should have embraced experimental aircraft. They could have had some sales, instead of a money pit.
Bill Jepson
On Jun 13, 2016 8:48 PM, "Lehanover" < flyrotary@lancaironline.net> wrote:
The intake was designed to fit the mid 80s style13B intake ports in both 2
rotor and 3 rotor engines. Runner length tuned to cruise RPM. intake design well
done. Reduction gearbox very well designed with power take off pulleys and
hydraulic propeller governor mount.
Versions of both engines also ran on jet A. Tried for years to get engines
certified in Europe and US. Probably not possible so as to maintain the status
of current 1920s technology aircraft engines.
I was offered an job with them. I helped all I could via Email. Test Piper
landed short when test muffler decomposed blocking exit flow. Destroyed Piper.
They tune like dirt bikes. Sensitive to exhaust flow and back pressure.
Lynn E. Hanover
|