Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #45609
From: Al Gietzen <ALVentures@cox.net>
Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: [Lancair_ES] Re: Rotary Engines
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 08:03:46 -0800
To: 'Rotary motors in aircraft' <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>

Good response, Mark.

 

Aside from whatever the details are; I was up at 14,500’ the other day, cruising along at 182 KTAS, in my comfortable 4-place airplane, burning about 10 gph of $2.17/ga fuel; and doing it very smo-o-o-othly.  It’s the results that count.

 

Al (Velocity 20B)

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Mark Steitle
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 5:26 AM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: [Lancair_ES] Re: Rotary Engines

 

Gary,

 

Thanks for adding a more technical tone to this discussion.  Yes, I was not accounting for all the misc pieces needed to make the rotary run, but then I wasn't considering all the little pieces needed to make a conventional piston engine run either.  Of the pieces that normally fail and end up poking out through the engine case, I think you'll agree that the rotary has significantly fewer of those.  In fact, I have never seen a rotary with a thrown connecting rod.  ;-)

 

Having a liquid cooling system is a two-edged sword, but its not anything that can't be overcome with good engineering.  For coolant lines on my installation I used aluminum tubing connected to the engine and radiator via "Wiggins" couplings.  I monitor coolant pressure, coolant level, and coolant temperature.  Of course, if I catch a Canadian goose in the radiator, it will likely loose its ability to cool the engine, but then you have the same risk with an air-cooled engine. 

As for the bsfc, do your numbers reflect the modern EFI systems, or carbureted engines.  Tracy Crook realized a significant improvement in bsfc when he switched from carburetors to EFI.  The new "Renesis" rotary engine has a better bsfc due to the side exhaust ports.  Anyway, I prefer to consider it in "dollars per air-mile".  By the time you factor in the cost savings for purchasing and maintaining a rotary engine over a certified engine, and that the rotary runs happily (prefers) on 89 UL fuel (half the cost of avgas), the cost per mile tips significantly in favor of the rotary.  (Reading the recent post about the $2300.00 oil pan practically brought tears to my eyes.)  I guess its the German in me that caused me to seek out something better, or different. 

 

Ahhhh... you mentioned the magic word, "turbo-charger".  I built my engine with the intention of turbo-charging as it was initially turbo-charged in its former life.  After much thought, I decided to follow the KISS principle and go N/A.  But there's a little voice in my head that keeps whispering "turbo-charge".  With the rotary's high energy exhaust gasses, turbo's are a natural solution.  Yes they add weight, but not much more than my current exhaust system.  Stay tuned...

 

One thing that I hadn't mentioned that could be considered a negative for the rotary engine is that very few A&P's know anything about rotary engines.  Heck, very few auto mechanics know how to work on a rotary engine.  But, if I'm there with my repairman's certificate in hand, who needs an A&P?  Also, rotary parts are less plentiful if you get stuck in some hole-in-the-wall town.  But there is always UPS overnight. 

 

Gary, thanks again for your thoughtful post.  I'm not trying to convert anyone to a rotary engine, I only want to see it get a fair shake.  

 

Mark S.

 

P.S.  I've CC'd the Fly Rotary group as they need something to talk about (the list has been rather quiet lately).

 

 

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster