Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: flyrotary
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 01:19:20 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-2352996@logan.com>
Reply-To: <13brv3@mchsi.com>
From: <13brv3@mchsi.com>
Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: coolant / thermostat
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <list-2351883@logan.com>

I tried a thermostat twice and could not get it to cool properly on the
ground in either case, so gave up and have flow 200 hours with no =
thermostat
and no problem.

Ed Anderson
------------------

=3D=3D=3D>  Was it OK in the air without the thermostat?  The way it =
looks to me,
if you have a properly working radiator system, a thermostat is a good
thing.  Since you have no electric fans, your radiators aren't working
"properly" on the ground, so removing the thermostat could certainly =
help. =20

On the other hand, the fact that removing it helps your ground cooling
proves that it's better to do without the thermostat if possible.  I =
also
wonder if there would be less chance of pump cavitation at higher RPM's
without the restriction of the thermostat. =20

Have you ever had a problem with temps being too cool?  How about when
descending from freezing altitudes at low power? =20

Still leaning toward trying it with the thermostat first.  I'll have one =
or
two electric fans for ground ops. =20

Thanks for the comments.
Rusty