X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from imo-d23.mx.aol.com ([205.188.139.137] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.2) with ESMTP id 2880201 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 01 May 2008 12:58:22 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.188.139.137; envelope-from=WRJJRS@aol.com Received: from WRJJRS@aol.com by imo-d23.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.3.) id q.c2e.2f3a7e2b (37556) for ; Thu, 1 May 2008 12:57:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from webmail-ne18 (webmail-ne18.sim.aol.com [207.200.67.18]) by cia-mb03.mx.aol.com (v121.5) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMB035-92b44819f67676; Thu, 01 May 2008 12:57:27 -0400 References: To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: PSRU Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 12:57:27 -0400 X-AOL-IP: 66.253.96.220 In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: wrjjrs@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CA79C391CBDFD7_16B8_27CD_webmail-ne18.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 36240-STANDARD Received: from 66.253.96.220 by webmail-ne18.sysops.aol.com (207.200.67.18) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Thu, 01 May 2008 12:57:26 -0400 Message-Id: <8CA79C3916A1EC9-16B8-13BF@webmail-ne18.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag: NO ----------MB_8CA79C391CBDFD7_16B8_27CD_webmail-ne18.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" George, If anything needs beefing up it would be the fore and aft direction. That could be improved by boxing the sides of the beams supporting the bearings. That would do more than thicker plates. That could be done with way less material that way rather than making the plates thicker Bill Jepson -----Original Message----- From: George Lendich To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Thu, 1 May 2008 12:11 am Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: PSRU Bill, The?front plate does not?appear to be tied to the rear plate ( at the top) other than with the prop shaft itself - to me it looks like there could be some flexing of this front cantilevered (from the bottom bellhousing) plate. Something I think could be better engineered - do you feel it's stiff enough? It also?looks very agricultural! I'm sure Jerry could make a much nicer job of it. George ( down under) ? Jerry, the plate behind the bellhousing looks 50% thicker than it needs to be for a double sided system. I do give him points for originality though. He needs to use a aluminum top sprocket for sure! Good support on both sides for sure, looks super stout. My guess is that the belt is certain to be the weak link in that system. He could do a serious lightening job on that and still be quite solid. Good re-sourcing of original materials. Bill Jepson -----Original Message----- From: Jerry Hey To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 2:45 pm Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: PSRU George, you are very hard to please! I think the guy who made this knew what he was doing. I'd like to know the weight too. One thing is for sure, a belt drive has to have two sprockets, upper and lower shafts, prop flange and so on. They all weigh at least 40 lbs. I think weight could be saved back by incorporating the alternator in the drive similar to Briggs and Stratton, likewise the forward engine mounts. Make that extra structure earn its keep. Jerry? ? On Apr 30, 2008, at 5:21 PM, George Lendich wrote:? ? >? >> Does anyone recognize this drive? I found the photo yesterday but? >> with no information. I think it is a beauty and I would like to know? >> more. Jerry? >? > Jerry,? > It looks very much a home made job, the top belt wheel looks to be > made of something solid and would be heavy I would imagine. I can't > say I like it or the engine mount - but Paul's the expert there.? > I'm sure you could make something better Jerry.? > It looks like they put the engine really low to cater for the off-> set thrust line - I wonder if it was made for a pusher?? > George ( down under)? >? > --? > 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? Plan your next roadtrip with MapQuest.com: America's #1 Mapping Site. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.7 - Release Date: 30/04/2008 12:00 AM ----------MB_8CA79C391CBDFD7_16B8_27CD_webmail-ne18.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" George,
If anything needs beefing up it would be the fore and aft direction. That could be improved by boxing the sides of the beams supporting the bearings. That would do more than thicker plates. That could be done with way less material that way rather than making the plates thicker
Bill Jepson


-----Original Message-----
From: George Lendich <lendich@optusnet.com.au>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Thu, 1 May 2008 12:11 am
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: PSRU

Bill,
The front plate does not appear to be tied to the rear plate ( at the top) other than with the prop shaft itself - to me it looks like there could be some flexing of this front cantilevered (from the bottom bellhousing) plate.
Something I think could be better engineered - do you feel it's stiff enough?
It also looks very agricultural! I'm sure Jerry could make a much nicer job of it.
George ( down under)
 
Jerry, the plate behind the bellhousing looks 50% thicker than it needs to be for a double sided system.
I do give him points for originality though. He needs to use a aluminum top sprocket for sure! Good support
on both sides for sure, looks super stout. My guess is that the belt is certain to be the weak link in that system.
He could do a serious lightening job on that and still be quite solid. Good re-sourcing of original materials.
Bill Jepson


-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Hey <jerry@jerryhey.com>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 2:45 pm
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: PSRU

George, you are very hard to please! I think the guy who made this knew what he was doing. I'd like to know the weight too. One thing is for sure, a belt drive has to have two sprockets, upper and lower shafts, prop flange and so on. They all weigh at least 40 lbs. I think weight could be saved back by incorporating the alternator in the drive similar to Briggs and Stratton, likewise the forward engine mounts. Make that extra structure earn its keep. Jerry 
 
On Apr 30, 2008, at 5:21 PM, George Lendich wrote: 
 
> 
>> Does anyone recognize this drive? I found the photo yesterday but 
>> with no information. I think it is a beauty and I would like to know 
>> more. Jerry 
> 
> Jerry, 
> It looks very much a home made job, the top belt wheel looks to be > made of something solid and would be heavy I would imagine. I can't > say I like it or the engine mount - but Paul's the expert there. 
> I'm sure you could make something better Jerry. 
> It looks like they put the engine really low to cater for the off-> set thrust line - I wonder if it was made for a pusher? 
> George ( down under) 
> 
> -- 
> 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 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.7 - Release Date: 30/04/2008 12:00 AM
----------MB_8CA79C391CBDFD7_16B8_27CD_webmail-ne18.sysops.aol.com--