From: "Tracy Crook" <lors01@msn.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-123489@logan.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo boost limits in the EC2
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 17:08:28 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <BAY3-DAV61ooXMdNWYm00012669@hotmail.com>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Brooks" <steve@tsisp.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Friday, June 04, 2004 7:54 AM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Turbo boost limits in the EC2


> I would rather opt for something that reduced power, not cutting it.  I
> don't think that I want to be climbing out at 200' AGL, and have the fuel
> cut off.  Even if I did get down OK, cleaning the inside of the plane
would
> be a major project.
>
> Either air or fuel would be difficult to control.  Cutting off a set of
> plugs, or maybe retarding the timing would seem like easier solutions, and
> also easier on the upholstery.
>
>
> Steve Brooks

Fuel cut makes sense in a car.  But I would not consider this as a solution
in an aircraft engine.

As I mentioned previously, I have built in the proven ways (that the EC2 has
any control over) of avoiding detonation.  Mainly, retarding the timing at
higher manifold pressures  (this is a fairly recent addition, around Jan 04)
I still think the easiest way to avoid over boost and detonation is pilot
awareness.  The EM2 has an adjustable boost alarm if you need an attention
getter.  Or you could hook the alarm light circuit to a cattle prod wired to
the pilots' seat if necessary : )

Tracy