Return-Path: <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Received: from imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.65] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.5) with ESMTP id 521166 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 00:05:47 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.65; envelope-from=13brv3@bellsouth.net Received: from rd ([65.6.194.9]) by imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.11 201-253-122-130-111-20040605) with ESMTP id <20041107050518.JPAT19872.imf17aec.mail.bellsouth.net@rd> for ; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 00:05:18 -0500 From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: EWP Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 23:05:27 -0600 Message-ID: <000801c4c487$65bc3a00$6101a8c0@rd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0009_01C4C455.1B21CA00" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C4C455.1B21CA00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable maybe I missed it, but for what reason would you want to run electric waterpumps? =20 - no cavitation at high rpm - better cooling at low rpm (holding for takeoff, etc) - more power available for the prop, particularly at higher rpm's = (remains to be proven how much more) - reliability (broken and throw belts are the only thing that's EVER stranded me in a car, happened twice) - easier, more flexible installation - redundancy (ever seen two mechanical pumps) - other advantages I'm too tired to think of at the moment. =20 For the record, I'm pretty happy with my series mechanical and EWP = setup. It's sort of like having the best of both worlds. The only reason I'll = go full EWP is if I can prove that there's significant performance to be gained. Frankly, I'll be surprised if I can tell any RPM difference = between mechanical, and EWP runs. =20 =20 Cheers, Rusty =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C4C455.1B21CA00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message
maybe I missed it, but for what reason = would you=20 want to run electric waterpumps?
 
- no=20 cavitation at high rpm
- better=20 cooling at low rpm (holding for = takeoff, etc)
- more power=20 available for the prop, particularly at higher rpm's (remains to=20 be proven how much more)
- reliability (broken and throw belts are the only = thing=20 that's EVER stranded me in a car, happened = twice)
-=20 easier, more flexible installation
- redundancy=20 (ever seen two mechanical pumps)
- other=20 advantages I'm too tired to think of at the = moment.
 
For the=20 record, I'm pretty happy with my series mechanical and=20 EWP setup.  It's sort of like having the best of both = worlds. =20 The only reason I'll go full EWP is if I can prove that there's = significant=20 performance to be gained.  Frankly, I'll be surprised if I can = tell=20 any RPM difference between mechanical, and EWP=20 runs.  
 
Cheers,
Rusty
 
------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C4C455.1B21CA00--