Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #11423
From: Smith, Randy <randy.smith@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: NACA vs. P51 Scoop
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 11:15:19 -0700
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On
Behalf Of Bill
>Dube
>Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 11:38 AM
>To: Rotary motors in aircraft
>Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: NACA vs. P51 Scoop
>
>If you are after the very ultimate in reliability, then a single-engine
>experimental aircraft with an alternative engine is probably not the
right
>choice.

Agreed.  However, since that is precisely what I am going to build, the
question becomes how I can build it with the most reliability possible
within my time and money constraints.

>
> Whenever you modify something, or build a prototype, little
things nearly
>always go wrong, no matter how careful and skilled you are. That is why
the
>FAA requires a fly-off period for all experimental aircraft. Of the
>alternative engines, a rotary appears to be the most reliable and
robust.
>However, the typical alternative engine installed in an experimental
>aircraft has a higher failure rate than the typical certified engine
>installed in an experimental aircraft.

I agree.  One benefit of having the plans and not being able to start
construction for almost 10 years is that I have had the time to reading
numerous web sites, read almost every posting on several mailing lists
and meet a variety of people who each have contributed to my knowledge
base.  I know it is risky and apt to fail...initially.  What I hope to
have when I'm done is an airplane/powerplant with several (hopefully)
well thought out improvements to allow for the type of missions I intend
to fly.

>
> If your target is ultimate reliability, you should probably buy
a
>certified twin-engine aircraft.

Why?  Hopefully because it is twin-engine and not because it is
certified.  But that is another discussion.  Besides, my target isn't
ultimate reliability.  My target is just what I said above.

> If your heart is set on "rolling your own" (including an
alternative
>engine) then perhaps you should build a twin-engine aircraft using a
pair
>of rotaries. Perhaps a scaled-down version of Rutan's Voyager.

Nothing of that sort is in my budget.  (nor exists that I know of) :-)

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