Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=72.52.218.78; envelope-from=bob@bob-white.com
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2009 10:58:51 -0600
From: Bob White <bob@bob-white.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] New in the group.
Message-Id: <20090308105851.ec6fff64.bob@bob-white.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-3532906@logan.com>
References: <list-3532906@logan.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Gonzalo,

I'm going to take the liberty of using a quote from Dave Leonard.  He
published it on this list a few days ago.

"I now have 370 hours and almost never remove the cowl anymore.  I fly
it hard and put it away wet.  I have not had an engine or engine
systems issue in nearly 200 hrs.

Compare that the the first 100 hrs where I was putting in almost 10 hrs
of maintenance for each our of flying and she has really come a long
way.

Way worth it!


David Leonard"

I would also add that a lot of the problems are being solved, and in
the last few months, there have been several reports of first flights
with NO heating problems!  You can expect to spend extra time getting
everything right because there isn't a bolt on solution as there is
with the "standard" engine setup.  Every builder will have something
unique in his installation.  The best way to minimize the extra effort
is to use the experiences of the builders that have gone before, and
it's starting to show results.

The rotary does need to turn at 6000 - 7500 rpm for best power so a
gear reduction is needed.  Tracy Crook sells a gear reduction unit that
does an excellent job.  It's been used in a lot of rotary installations
and has a proven track record.  He also has engine controllers,
monitors, and other items.

I cut my rotary flying short due to my bad judgement that resulted in
serious damage to my aircraft in a landing accident.  At that point my
major issues were marginal cooling and a prop that wasn't matched to my
needs very well.  I feel very confident that with a few modifications
and a new prop those issues would have been resolved.

Just my opinion FWIW ($0.02 or less)

Bob W.


On Sun, 8 Mar 2009 11:51:25 -0300
Gonzalo A. Gim=E9nez Celis <gonza@gimenez.cl> wrote:

> Hi Group, my name is Gonzalo, I=92m from Chile, building a Cozy MK IV and=
 new
> in this group.
>=20
> =20
>=20
> As you can imagine. Although I have a couple of years left of building, I=
=92m
> moving ahead looking for engine options. Of all the alternatives I=92ve
> founded in the web, always I come back to the same two options: the XP-360
> and the Rotary.
>=20
> =20
>=20
> The XP-360 represent, I think, the =93traditional approach=94, while the =
Rotary
> is like the new era. I=92ve been reading a lot, and I think I can resume =
all
> my reading in one statement: the users of traditional general aviation
> engines (Lyc type) says that if I go with the rotary, I=92ll expend more =
time
> trying to make it working than actually flying, so, after a while, I=92ll
> become so tired that I=92ll move to the Lyc type anyway, because the Rota=
ry is
> less reliable.
>=20
> =20
>=20
> I=92ve meet Bulent Aliev, a very nice guy who showed me his aircraft (ver=
y,
> very nice) and he had a Rotary, and after 20 hour he moved to a XP-360. He
> told me that there are too much electronics involved with the Wankel. He
> told me that If I want to fly, use the Lyc.
>=20
> =20
>=20
> On the other side, Bulent told me that the factory of the XP-360 is broke,
> so, the warranty is no longer valid. (supposed to be 3 years)
>=20
> =20
>=20
> One very important issue I think is the maintenance and replacement parts.
> Aviation engines are SO expensive, while I think that the Rotary might be
> cheaper.
>=20
> =20
>=20
> Also, I would like to have some information about some issues that the Ly=
c.
> says are the weak points of the Wankel, like high operating RPM,
> difficulties for cooling, too much electronics, and others=85
>=20
> =20
>=20
> At the end, to be honest I like very much the Rotary idea, so I=92m askin=
g you
> for opinion and experience, since I think that almost all the people who =
say
> that the Rotary doesn=92t work actually has no experience with it.
>=20
> =20
>=20
> Thanks a lot for your time.
>=20
> =20
>=20
> Gonzalo
>=20
> Santiago - Chile
>=20
> =20
>=20
>=20


--=20
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 - http://www.bob-white.com
3.8 Hours Total Time and holding
Cables for your rotary installation - http://roblinstores.com/