Return-Path: Received: from relay04.roc.ny.frontiernet.net ([66.133.131.37] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.7) with ESMTP id 2742216 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:36:07 -0500 Received: (qmail 21137 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2003 04:36:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO frontiernet.net) ([170.215.97.8]) (envelope-sender ) by relay04.roc.ny.frontiernet.net (FrontierMTA 2.3.6) with SMTP for ; 18 Nov 2003 04:36:05 -0000 Message-ID: <3FB9A1CE.CE25DC3E@frontiernet.net> Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:36:30 -0600 From: Jim Sower X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: inline twin engines? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <... been done in England, with two Norton 2-rotors ...> I believe so - maybe 10 yrs ago. Also more recently with Jibaru at http://homestead.juno.com/mikefly/TwinEZ.html or wherever it is now Not a really great idea ... Jim S. Charlie & Tupper England wrote: > John Slade wrote: > > > > Think it will work out ? > > Not a chance in hell, Rusty. The structure to hold an engine at the > > front simply isnt there. It would be a VERY major redesign, and would > > probably end up too heavy to fly. On top of the that, the weight and > > balance would be all wrong. I think the best way to put 2 engines on > > an EZ would be in pods on the strakes. > > > > John > > Hasn't it been done in England, with two Norton 2-rotors? > > >> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > >> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html -- Jim Sower Crossville, TN; Chapter 5 Long-EZ N83RT, Velocity N4095T