Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: flyrotary
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 14:03:27 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1840839@logan.com>
From: peon@pacific.net.au
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Scientific Inference,  Testing & AutoSpeed Test was EWP pumping, pumping...... still pumping
Reply-to: leon@promotorsport.com.au
Priority: normal
In-reply-to: <list-1840488@logan.com>

On 19 Oct 2002, at 23:32, Haywire wrote:

SNIP>>

 A bit
> more alarming is this: >
> http://www.autospeed.co.nz/A_0569/page1.html?src=suggestions > I
> wonder if they would share results under a NDA? >
> 
> Yes, I must agree, I find this very alarming. I wonder what the test
> results were.
> 
> S. Todd Bartrim
> Turbo 13B rotary powered
> RV-9endurance (FWF)
> C-FSTB
> http://www3.telus.net/haywire/RV-9/C-FSTB.htm
> 

Hi Guys,

Me (agian!!).  Re the Autospeed test,  from what I have heard,  
(Admittedly from Richard Davies of Davies Craig), their scientific 
methodology, shall we say,  left a LOT to be desired.  If your 
radiator happens to be partially clogged,  and undersized to start 
with,  no test will be meaningful.  I don't know for fact that this was 
the case,  but it has the ring of truth to it.

So I hope  you guys can wait until I get back in harness,  I will then 
be able to answer ALL your questions.  I will publish my test 
procedures and methodology well before I do the actual tests.  In 
the best traditions of Karl Popper,  See;

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/

I will endeavour to structure and conduct the tests in such a 
manner that they can be repeated elsewhere at any time.  Back to 
back tests on the same car,  on the same dyno,  on the same day, 
and within an hour of each other.  (To allow cooldown so that I don't 
scald myself). 

I will take the scientifically correct procedure and try to prove 
myself wrong.  (A reading of Popper's "The Logic of Scientific 
Discovery" is almost mandatory for anyone doing rigorous testing).

So guys,  keep on theorising,  and doing those endless 
calculations until I get the hard experimental facts for you. 

I doubt if there is ANYONE out there who can tell me just how 
much a stock Mazda ware pump flows at what RPM and at what 
thermostat opening/temperatures,  and how many BHP it 
consumes when doing it.  

Unless you can,  you are wasting your time doing all these 
meaningless calculations.  But I tell you what,  in about 6 weeks,  
I'll KNOW beyond all reasonable doubt.

See,  I really don't want to be selling them if they don't work as 
advertised,  but I also want to be able to take gainsayers and 
theoreticians to task if they DO happen to work as advertised.  

Moreover,  I will NOT be trying to prove myself right.  I do know 
from anecdotal evidence that the EWP does work as advertised.  
However,  until I do the testing,  I can't back it up with repeatable 
test data.  

None of this car testing will, of course, PROVE (as someone 
rightly pointed out)  that they will also work in an aircraft. For that 
we need one to be fitted to an aircraft.  (My offer of stumping up 
over 50% of the cost for a test unit still stands!!).

But the car testing  WILL demonstrate one way or another that the 
EWP either works as advertised or it doesn't,  which is the issue.  I 
really don't care either way.  

If it does work,  I'll continue to pomote and sell them.  If it doesn't,  
I shall NOT be selling them and I shall have to eat humble pie,  
recant on this and "the Other Place" as well as give Todd his 
money back and a 2 week free holiday in Sydney!  In the process,  
we will all learn a lot!

Cheers people,  bye for now,

Best wishes & Kindest Regards,

Leon Pomet
leon@promotorsport.com.au

> 
> 
> >>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/