X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.121] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c1) with ESMTP id 2500719 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 22 Nov 2007 10:00:25 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.121; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from edward2 ([24.74.103.61]) by cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com with SMTP id <20071122145945.BQZU6760.cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com@edward2> for ; Thu, 22 Nov 2007 14:59:45 +0000 Message-ID: <000501c82d18$ad663200$2402a8c0@edward2> From: "Ed Anderson" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: [Bulk] 16x Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 10:02:18 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 Well, I don't fly in the hot summer months. Do most of my flying in the fall and spring. You're right with $4.00+ gallon fuel, that makes a 2 hour flight boring holes cost me 16*4.00 = $64.00. After 400 hours in my Rotary, boring holes at $32.00/hour fuel cost, that just doesn't appeal as it once might have. Now, give me a place to go and its a different story. I usually make several 1000+ mile round trips in a year, but other than to fly to check out a new idea, I simply don't get in the air like I use to {:>). Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Steitle" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 9:53 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: [Bulk] 16x > Wow Ed, you really need to get out more! Of course, with current fuel > prices I can't say that I blame you for sitting home playing on the > computer. I was just trying to get a feel for what to expect for > engine life on my 20B. > > Mark > > > > On Nov 22, 2007 7:29 AM, Ed Anderson wrote: >> Lets see, Mark, that rebuilt was in 05 down in Louisiana. I fly around >> 50 >> hours a year so, I've probably put around 100 hours on the rebuilt >> engine. >> >> Ed >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Mark Steitle" >> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" >> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 9:04 AM >> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: [Bulk] 16x >> >> >> > Ed, >> > How many flight hours does your engine have on it since last rebuild? >> > >> > Mark >> > >> > On Nov 22, 2007 5:45 AM, Ed Anderson wrote: >> >> Thanks, George, that in indeed interesting information. Long throw >> >> should >> >> mean more torque. Be interesting to see how they have improved the >> >> sealing. >> >> Two years more development then all the production (assuming they go >> >> forward >> >> with it), so I should expect to see it for at least 5 years. Well, >> >> hopefully the old 13B will hold out for that long. >> >> >> >> Ed >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "George Lendich" >> >> To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" >> >> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 1:51 AM >> >> Subject: [FlyRotary] Fw: [Bulk] 16x >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> Ed, Lynn and Bill + >> >> >> >> >> >> This was posted to me privately and may help to clarify the >> >> >> specifications of the 16x. Some of the info are estimations by Rolf >> >> >> Pfeiffer ex - NSU engineer. >> >> >> >> >> >>> Hello George >> >> >>> Nice to hear from you. Here is my assessment: >> >> >> >> >> >> Also info supplied by Don Sherman as follows:- >> >> >> >> >> >> I interviewed Seiji Tashima, the engineering expert for Mazda's new >> >> >> rotary, at Tokyo on your behalf. Here are a few details he >> >> >> revealed: >> >> >> Rotor width reduced by 5mm saves weight, improves apex seal >> >> >> performance >> >> >> trochoid is 25mm wider, 35mm taller for more displacement and >> >> >> torque >> >> >> would not reveal increase in eccentricity. New displacement is >> >> >> 800cc/rotor. >> >> >> >> >> >> Aluminum end plates have plasma-sprayed wear surface direct and >> >> >> indirect >> >> >> fuel injection. >> >> >> >> >> >> Torque gains come from longer e-dimension, more displacement, and >> >> >> direct >> >> >> injection. >> >> >> >> >> >> He would not confirm 300 hp power goal. >> >> >> All the gas seals are improved, with smaller flame holes adjacent >> >> >> to >> >> >> spark plugs. >> >> >> The 16x engine ran for the first time this year, full development >> >> >> will >> >> >> be >> >> >> at least 2 more years. >> >> >> >> >> >> Engine weight is reduced from 125kg [275 pounds] to 100 kg [220 >> >> >> pounds]. >> >> >> >> >> >> Assessment by Rolf Pfeiffer as follows:- >> >> >> >> >> >>> /Now, using above dimensions we get the following: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> 25 mm wider means the short axis goes from 180 to 205 mm. >> >> >>> 35 mm taller means the long axis goes from 240 to 275 mm. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> This results in E = 17.5 mm, and R = 120 mm. >> >> >>> The old dimensions were E = 15 mm and R = 105 (including the >> >> >>> radius >> >> >>> of 3 >> >> >>> mm for the apex seals). >> >> >>> The ratio R/E is 6.857, down from 7.0. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> The ratio of stroke to piston area becomes higher which is what >> >> >>> they >> >> >>> want, I suppose. >> >> >>> The RX7/8's were 0.33 S/D, above numbers would be 0.3764, a >> >> >>> substantial >> >> >>> 14% improvement in ratio of stroke to equivalent piston diameter. >> >> >>> A >> >> >>> long >> >> >>> stroke engine, so to speak. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I also had stated that: >> >> >>> NSU also went that direction with their latest developments before >> >> >>> folding. >> >> >>> We are lucky that Mazda has the financial means and does carry on. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> The last big NSU unit EA 871 was approximately like this: >> >> >>> (Calculating >> >> >>> back from its displacement and width. I had already left by then, >> >> >>> so >> >> >>> the >> >> >>> info is calculated.) >> >> >>> E = 17.28, R = 120.5, width = 69 (given), displacement = 746.6 cc >> >> >>> (given). >> >> >>> This is very close to what Mazda seems to be doing now, if above >> >> >>> numbers >> >> >>> are right. >> >> >>> NSU had great hopes in that engine. It was used in a German >> >> >>> fan-liner. >> >> >>> It was the high point of the Wankel development at NSU. >> >> >>> Then the money did run out. NSU was merged with AUDI, and VW the >> >> >>> parent, >> >> >>> killed it all. All further development was stopped. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Fan Trainer: >> >> >>> http://www.der-wankelmotor.de/Flugzeuge/RFB/rfb.html#Fanliner >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Regards >> >> >>> Rolf >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> George Lendich wrote: >> >> >>>> Rolf, >> >> >>>> Could you give me your assessment of the new 16X eccentric. If I >> >> >>>> remember correctly you gave you assessment on Paul's site. There >> >> >>>> is >> >> >>>> discussion on another site and I would like to pass it on to >> >> >>>> interested >> >> >>>> parties. >> >> >>>> Also if my memory serves me right, you mentioned a manufacturer >> >> >>>> was >> >> >>>> working on a similar size ( change in eccentric) and what company >> >> >>>> that >> >> >>>> was. >> >> >>>> Am I wrong to believe it was the company you were working with at >> >> >>>> the >> >> >>>> time? >> >> >>>> George Lendich >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >> >> > Archive and UnSub: >> >> > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >> >> Archive and UnSub: >> >> http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html >> >> >> > >> > -- >> > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >> > Archive and UnSub: >> > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html >> > >> >> >> -- >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ >> Archive and UnSub: >> http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html >> > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html >