X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from [129.116.87.143] (HELO MAIL01.austin.utexas.edu) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.7f) with ESMTP id 953357 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:44:59 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=129.116.87.143; envelope-from=mark.steitle@austin.utexas.edu X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C621CE.92B68F79" Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: Two Alternators? Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 10:44:13 -0600 Message-ID: <87DBA06C9A5CB84B80439BA09D86E69E0387D421@MAIL01.austin.utexas.edu> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [FlyRotary] Re: Two Alternators? Thread-Index: AcYhzA4sVLLaLapkRLGu9cJQ8MyffAAAEaog From: "Mark R Steitle" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C621CE.92B68F79 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Al, Looking at a picture of your engine install (very nice), it appears that you're running the factory Mazda (Mitsubishi) alternator? If it is the same as those I have on hand, they weigh about 11#. My rationale is that two ND alternators weigh 5.5#/ea, so there is little to no weight penalty. If you could get by with a single ND unit, then you should see about 6# net savings. In the conversion, I gained a second wp belt as well as electrical redundancy. With the batteries back in the tail, I need plenty of amps to crank the 3-rotor (Batteries cross-feed during starting). Add an all electric panel, and I felt the weight of the extra battery was worth it. From what I'm told, most Lancair ES's are nose heavy, at least with the IO-540 engine. Also, all the Lancair ES's I've seen are running two batteries, located in the tail. =20 =20 I'll be doing the W&B soon, so we'll see how it does compared to those "certified" guys. =20 Mark =20 =20 ________________________________ From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Buly Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 9:35 AM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Two Alternators? =20 =20 =20 On Jan 25, 2006, at 10:23 AM, Al Gietzen wrote: =20 I have 2 alternators - although since I have 2 batteries and I'm heavy (the plane that is) - I'm considering taking one of the alternators out. I mounted the second alternator on the intake side just above where the water inlet is. This picture isn't very good - but you get the idea of where it is. It's a small 6lb. Powermaster alternator. =20 Regards, Joe Hull =20 It would seem that taking out one battery would get rid of more weight; unless you have some other reason for wanting to get rid of the second alternator. Although I'd say a battery is more reliable than an alternator. =20 I think two batteries and two alternators is redundant redundancy, and a weight penalty. But that's just me. =20 Al =20 I'm with Al on this. I have one 70A alternator and two batteries at the nose for CG purpose. Bully ------_=_NextPart_001_01C621CE.92B68F79 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Al,

Looking at a picture of your engine install (very nice), it appears that you’re running the factory = Mazda (Mitsubishi) alternator?  If it is the same as those I have on hand, they weigh = about 11#.  My rationale is that two ND alternators weigh 5.5#/ea, so = there is little to no weight penalty.  If you could get by with a single ND = unit, then you should see about 6# net savings.  In the conversion, I = gained a second wp belt as well as electrical redundancy.  With the = batteries back in the tail, I need plenty of amps to crank the 3-rotor (Batteries = cross-feed during starting).  Add an all electric panel, and I felt the weight = of the extra battery was worth it.  From what I’m told, most Lancair = ES’s are nose heavy, at least with the IO-540 engine.  Also, all the = Lancair ES’s I’ve seen are running two batteries, located in the tail.  =

 

I’ll be doing the W&B = soon, so we’ll see how it does compared to those “certified” = guys.

 

Mark  =      

 

From: = Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Buly
Sent: Wednesday, January = 25, 2006 9:35 AM
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: = Two Alternators?

 

 



 

On Jan 25, 2006, at 10:23 AM, Al Gietzen = wrote:



 

I have 2 alternators – although since I have 2 batteries and I’m = heavy (the plane that is) – I’m considering taking one of the = alternators out. I mounted the second alternator on the intake side just above where the = water inlet is.  This picture isn’t very good – but you get = the idea of where it is. It’s a small 6lb. Powermaster = alternator.

 

Regards,

Joe Hull

 

It would seem = that taking out one battery would get rid of more weight; unless you have = some other reason for wanting to get rid of the second alternator. Although = I’d say a battery is more reliable than an alternator.

 

I think two = batteries and two alternators is redundant redundancy, and a weight penalty.  = But that’s just me.

 

Al



 

I'm with Al on this. I have one 70A alternator and two batteries = at the nose for CG purpose.

Bully

------_=_NextPart_001_01C621CE.92B68F79--