Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.225.28.220; envelope-from=cardmarc@charter.net
Message-ID: <503619794.1148476405580.JavaMail.root@fepweb03>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 6:13:25 -0700
From: <cardmarc@charter.net>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Rationalization was  [FlyRotary] Re: Questions
 from a potential rotaryphile
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sensitivity: Normal

I too hope that one day Ed Kleppis and his ideas for a firewall foreward 13B engine package become reality. If anyone could support the effort it would be Ed-he makes oil pans, radiators, expansion tanks, intakes, all to order-great welding and fabrication support.
Marc Wiese


---- Thomas y Reina Jakits <rijakits@cwpanama.net> wrote: 
> MessageI hope Mistral can keep their price competitive with Lycoming.
> Than we shall see!!
> 
> TJ :))
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Russell Duffy
>   To: Rotary motors in aircraft
>   Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 5:11 PM
>   Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Rationalization was [FlyRotary] Re: Questions from a
> potential rotaryphile
> 
> 
>   However, I believe,  there is plenty of objective evidence that says the
> rotary is comparable or better than the Lycoming in just about any aspect you
> want to consider.
> 
>   Hi Ed,
> 
>   I would agree with the above statement, but unfortunately, the one key area
> where the rotary clearly hasn't demonstrated superiority is "FWF reliability".
> The rotary group has had way too many failures in the past couple years, and
> this needs to be the area we work on.  Most of it has been silly things, and I'm
> certainly ashamed for my contribution to the problems.
>   Even the Aviation Sport article supports that conclusion
> 
>   Does anyone have an electronic copy of this article they could send me?  I
> guess I'm the only one who hasn't read it.
> 
>   certainly cost less (even if you have to buy engine parts new), etc., etc.
> So no doubt there is some rationalization- but I'm not certain over what?
> 
>   I would argue cost, and have in the past.  I would (actually have) bet real
> money that the $21k Lyclone I just installed on the RV-8 will work out to be
> cheaper than a rotary engine installation over the few years (at least) that I
> hope to fly this plane.  This factors in resale of course.
> 
>   IF somebody would take the rotary and produce a reasonably price FWF kit, I
> believe you would find the rotary installations would expand exponentially.
> Most folks are understandably a bit daunted by the challenge of designing and
> putting that all together on their on.
> 
>   Amen brother!!!  This is certainly what would need to happen.   Powersport
> made a great engine installation, but at such a high price that not too many
> people bought it.  If someone like Eggenfellner would make a rotary package, it
> would be expensive, but from a name that people know (whether they can spell it
> or not), and trust.  I would certainly hope that people would see the value of a
> rotary over the Subaru given the same price, and FWF producer.
> 
>   Better get started on that article now :-)  Actually, I was wondering if the
> rotary group could put together it's own fly-off between similar planes.  It
> would have to be well documented, but we have enough engineers here to make sure
> of that.  Heck, in the not too distant future, we should ( <--- key word <g>)
> have a 2 and 3 rotor RV-8 to test against my Lycoming.
> 
>   Cheers,
>   Rusty (T-minus about 53 hours until I'm back home)
> 
>   PS, can't wait to hear how the 500HP Lancair flies!