Received-SPF: softfail
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=171.71.176.71; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com
Message-ID: <43540111.7080502@nc.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 15:52:49 -0400
From: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
Reply-To: echristley@nc.rr.com
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Displacement - Again? Timing of the Work
References: <list-771100@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-771100@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Bob White wrote:

>Let me re-emphasize this:  Every detail of Ed's analysis looks exactly
>correct to me.  The Mazda 13B produces power and breathes about the same
>way a 4 cylinder 2.6L 4 cycle piston engine does, or about the same as a
>2 cylinder 1.3L 2 cycle piston engine.
>
>  
>
Yeah, but what if the eShaft had an integrated reduction drive that 
dropped the ouput to 1/3, so that the eShaft output and the rotors had 
the same speed.  Would it then breathe like a 3.9L 2 cycle,  or a 5.2L 4 
cycle?
8*)

>I also think it sound better to think of the rotary as a 3.9L engine
>turning 3000 rpm (rotor speed) rather than a 1.3L engine turning 9000
>rpm (output shaft speed).  It's too bad we can't easily couple the
>propeller directly to the rotors and eliminate the PSRU.  Now that
>would be a setup.
>
>Bob W.
>  
>

We could do that; especially easy on a single rotor.  Press in a 
propeller adapter in place of the rotor bearing.  Then the wobble of the 
propeller would almost be enough to make you think your were flying 
behind a Lycoming again!  The certified crowd would feel right at home!!

(The peanut gallery hath spoken 8*)

-- 
         ,|"|"|,                                    |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===----        Dyke Delta         |
        o|  d  |o          www.ernest.isa-geek.org  |