Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.101; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com
Message-ID: <423A4A03.3050208@nc.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 22:24:51 -0500
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (X11/20041127)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Electric water pump
References: <list-801020@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-801020@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Bartrim, Todd wrote:

>     Because I knew that many were watching closely as mine was the 
> first known aircraft use of an EWP (some hoping for success and many 
> expecting failure), I decided that 1.25" hoses were mandatory. I'd 
> originally started my installation with 1" hose, but changed my mind 
> on this before I was even completed that part of the installation.
>  
> Todd
>
>     **
>
Todd, FWIW, my plan is to come out of the engine with 1" hose, to a 
manifold on the firewall that will split it into 2 3/4" pipes, down 
through independant pumps/rads, back up front through 2 more 3/4" pipe, 
another manifold to a 1" hose back to the block.  Since the inlets to 
the pumps are 3/4", I didn't see very much gain in going to anything larger.

-- 
This is by far the hardest lesson about freedom. It goes against
instinct, and morality, to just sit back and watch people make
mistakes. We want to help them, which means control them and their
decisions, but in doing so we actually hurt them (and ourselves)."