X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from m15.nyc.untd.com ([64.136.22.78] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.4) with SMTP id 986816 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 06 Jun 2005 20:51:08 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.136.22.78; envelope-from=jbker@juno.com Received: from m15.nyc.untd.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by m15.nyc.untd.com with SMTP id AABBLK53YAAYSNZS for (sender ); Mon, 6 Jun 2005 17:49:58 -0700 (PDT) X-UNTD-OriginStamp: Y+Mfppm2QyGfnY/dq+iW1dD6aHsZElqF/Z5TpK6kzmv6T+DzLFmP+A== Received: (from jbker@juno.com) by m15.nyc.untd.com (jqueuemail) id KUUTFJFP; Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:49:35 PDT To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 20:48:09 -0400 Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: rotary risks. MTBE and the gospel ... Message-ID: <20050606.204809.1484.0.JBKER@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-16,23,27-28,37-40,42-43 From: WALTER B KERR X-ContentStamp: 15:7:1305961134 X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 127.0.0.1|localhost|m15.nyc.untd.com|jbker@juno.com Al W wrote:> > Here's an excellent example. I've seen people describe their > reasoning > for going rotary. Often I would hear: "It only has three moving > parts, > therefore it's safer". I suspect that 80% of you believed that. That > is a > gross error in perspective. No maybe, it's a huge distortion. It's > a > wonderful theory, it has a component of truth in it, but totally > fails > the tests for significance. If a logical theory is not significant, > you > dump the theory. -------------------------------------------------------- Have stayed out of this as long as I can, but it seems strange to me as a gas turbine designer of 33 years that Al would make this comment without at least backing his words up a bit. I find it hard to believe that a modern technology reciprocating engine that is snapping pistons back and forth at 5000 rpm with cams and valves is anywhere as safe as a rotary. If the modern tech recip requires a PSRU and the addition of water cooling those things components are canceling. Having participated in many FEMA studies over the years ,I find some of Al's comments a bit strange. His heart may be in the right place to try to help us Rotorheads, but am not convinced he is helping us sort out what is important to take care of to eliminate failures. Will never forget my intro to rotary's. A friend at work raced a rotary powered car. He took the car to the Daytona 24 hour without detuning and after returning he left the car on the trailer and went to miami next week without any additional work. This was a totally different story from the recip guys. They installed very expensive forged lightweight parts and deturned the engine. After the race they replaced all of them before the next event. Does that say something to you about the robustness of the rotary? Does to me and is one of the big reasons I am flying one today. Bernie Kerr, 40 hours on 13B powered RV9A, PS. Do I feel as comfortable with the 9A as I did when I sold the Lycoming powered 6A ? Not Yet! > >