|
|
Marvin Kaye wrote:
All this talk about 2.85 gear boxes, getting higher into the power curve, improving cliumb performance, etc, is really interesting. Since 3 of my 6 initial reasons for going rotary were reliability, I'm wondering what running at these higher power levels is going to do in that regard. I'm pretty convinced that running at 5300-5500 rpms at cruise is a good formula for having an engine that isn't overtaxed and Tracy's experience has borne this out. Isn't there any concern out there about increased wear to the rotor housings, greater potential for catastrophic failure and so on, at these considerably higher constant power levels? I hate to be a wet blanket, but what are the real longterm tradeoffs in operating routinely at 15-20% higher power levels?
<Marv>
Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
The racing guys have told us that the rotary holds up well at the higher RPMs, but it is true that a rotor housing only has so many revolutions in it, so it does wear out faster. Run it at higher RPM, it doesn't last as long. The way I rationalize it is that I'll probably put in about 100hrs a year. Rebuilding at 1000hrs will give me a decade of flight. In a decade the 200 pound RX-12 engine will give me 400hp in a package that I can carry in a briefcase. I'll worry about designing a new engine mount then.
Some things bother me less than others 8*)
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
alleviated by information and experience."
Veeduber
|
|