Return-Path: Received: from out007.verizon.net ([206.46.170.107] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2) with ESMTP id 380923 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:04:42 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=206.46.170.107; envelope-from=finn.lassen@verizon.net Received: from verizon.net ([4.12.145.173]) by out007.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.06 201-253-122-130-106-20030910) with ESMTP id <20040827150411.ESKK1210.out007.verizon.net@verizon.net> for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:04:11 -0500 Message-ID: <412F4D64.9090801@verizon.net> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 11:04:04 -0400 From: Finn Lassen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax; PROMO) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: More rev-3 tests References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000005060001030403090203" X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at out007.verizon.net from [4.12.145.173] at Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:04:11 -0500 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000005060001030403090203 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Russell Duffy wrote: > Great. I'm glad to see that some of my babble will reduce the pain > and suffering of others :-) > > BTW, I've decided to make an airbox that will bolt to the TB, and > incorporate the airhorns that are currently in place. It will have a > 3" inlet duct going back to the right radiator duct if possible. If I > can't fit the 3" duct under the radiator, then I'll have to make a new > scoop. Just won't know until I get the parts in hand. I'm > (stubbornly) going to continue trying to use CEET (lower temp, cheaper > SCEET) tubing, even though it has some turbulent flow when bent. If > it works well, I'll eventually fit a smooth tube of some type. > > Cheers, > Rusty (running out of rev numbers) From all we've seen it looks like a clean, direct (not shared) ram inlet is the way to go. I suspect that some wierd (turbulence) stuff is going on in the radiator ducts. But go ahead and do it the hard way :) Finn --------------000005060001030403090203 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Russell Duffy wrote:

Message
Great. I'm glad to see that some of my babble will reduce the pain and suffering of others :-)

BTW, I've decided to make an airbox that will bolt to the TB, and incorporate the airhorns that are currently in place. It will have a 3" inlet duct going back to the right radiator duct if possible. If I can't fit the 3" duct under the radiator, then I'll have to make a new scoop. Just won't know until I get the parts in hand. I'm (stubbornly) going to continue trying to use CEET (lower temp, cheaper SCEET) tubing, even though it has some turbulent flow when bent. If it works well, I'll eventually fit a smooth tube of some type.

Cheers,

Rusty (running out of rev numbers)

From all we've seen it looks like a clean, direct (not shared) ram inlet is the way to go. I suspect that some wierd (turbulence) stuff is going on in the radiator ducts. But go ahead and do it the hard way :)

Finn
--------------000005060001030403090203--