Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=204.127.202.64; envelope-from=n3773@comcast.net
Message-ID: <001901c49b5e$6f069530$f18c1518@rv8>
Reply-To: "kevin lane" <n3773@comcast.net>
From: "kevin lane" <n3773@comcast.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-412346@logan.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Experimental Twin  (was Limp home, etc...)
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 12:58:53 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

knock on wood, but, when it comes to the reliability issue, I can't complain 
of my O-320.  yes, I am building an -8 with a 20B, but I also fly a -6A with 
close to 1000 hrs on a O-320.  it has taken me to mt. Denali, the Bahamas, 
across the entire US 8 times, and even on the last trip home from the rotary 
round-up where the weather shut down all around me in the middle of Nevada 
and I was thinking how damn cold it was going to be after I landed on one of 
those snow speckled dirt roads, up to 16,000' to do some vfr on top back to 
"anywhere but here" as I told flight following.  I build my new plane for 
the learning experience, but also recognize the facts of a certified, 
air-cooled engine.  I also had that plane flying in 2 1/2 years, since it 
has all been figured out.  I have bet my life many times on the o-320 and 
vangrunsven.  some day I believe the 20B will match it's record, but there 
are a lot of tests to do first.
Kevin Lane  Portland, OR
e-mail-> n3773@comcast.net
web-> http://home.comcast.net/~n3773
(browse w/ internet explorer)
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Smith, Randy" <randy.smith@intel.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 12:05 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Experimental Twin (was Limp home, etc...)


My rejection of the Defiant is based on
1.  The lack of builder support.  This is a perception on my part as I
have "only heard" that RAF no longer supports one-off plans builders.
2.  Too expensive to operate when compared to the Mk-IV. (including fuel
and insurance)
3.  It doesn't fit my mission profile.  By that I mean that I will
occasionally fly long distances over water and will therefore
occasionally need the supposed "ultimate" reliability.  The rest of the
time, that extra engine is just extra weight making airplane noises.
4.  I just don't like it, and I don't want to build one.  Not gonna make
me, either!  :-)  How's that for being "defiant?"

But still I think you are missing my point.  I never set out to find the
"ultimate reliability" in the first place.  I only wanted to see if I
could improve the reliability of the airplane that I was going to build.
The answer to that question still may be no.  And that's ok.  That will
lead to some level setting of my expectations as a result.  And I do
appreciate the locater service that Jesse provided and I'm sure it will
be a good fit for someone.

-Randy


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On
Behalf Of Bill
>Dube
>Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 10:49 AM
>To: Rotary motors in aircraft
>Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Experimental Twin (was Limp home, etc...)
>
>
>>
>>
>>I really am not interested in building a defiant though.  The MkIV
will
>>be sufficient.
>
>         Interesting. A couple of days ago, you were all gung ho about
>ultimate reliability. You then reject the suggestion of a home-built
twin
>because it would be beyond your budget and "they don't exist." Next,
Jesse
>finds a partially-built Defiant (with a pair of rotary engines) that is
>bargain priced. This meets your stated requirements EXACTLY. Especially
on
>a tight budget.

>         If my goal was to build an airplane to fly long distances over
the
>ocean, this is, without a doubt, the ideal airplane. I would jump all
over
>this. It is likely that, given the head start, this airplane would be
>faster and much cheaper to build than the Cozy you are clinging to (but
>have not actually started.)
>
>         What gives?


>>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
>>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html