Return-Path: Received: from [65.33.165.45] (account ) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 4.0b1) with HTTP id 1238097 for ; Wed, 15 May 2002 01:02:45 -0400 From: "Marvin Kaye" Subject: Re: [LML] Engine For The IVP To: lml X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro Web Mailer v.4.0b1 Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 01:02:45 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <001d01c1fba9$05be7fe0$8c00a8c0@John> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Posted for "John Barrett" <2thman@olympus.net>: Hi Scott, I appreciated your posting and all the commentary it generated. Hope springs eternal that my engine will be on its way soon. I'm wondering if the film samples I sent you ever arrived. I can send more if need be. Let me know. I exposed a large sheet film 5"X14" with a metal object on top of it. The result was inadequate. Edges slightly blurry and the unexposed area turns out white (slightly opaque) rather than clear. Also, I'm having a hard time figuring out how we could send a computer graphics file to someone who would then burn this on to the film. There may be a way, but I don't know of it yet. Bottom line, I'm skeptical that sheet film is the best medium to use here. I've looked at some Lexan that may be perfect. I have a friend (Dee) who does screen printing and she turned me on to this. The piece I saw was about 1/32" thick and had a nice matt finish on one side. Dee is checking to see if we can get it somewhat thicker and matt finished on both sides. If thick enough it should be stiff enough to use as a face with nothing between it and the lights. She will look for samples and do some trial runs screen printing it with some lettering in reverse print and varying translucent colors as well as clear. I'm pretty impressed with the way this stuff looks. I'll wait and see what the results are and if it looks promising will send you some to try out your LEDs with. I don't expect any activity for a week or two, but will prod the process along as I have time. I had Dee sit in my car and we turned the ignition on and off to see the test pattern of the idiot lights on the panel. Then we used a flashlight to try to discern the patterns and colors. It appears that my Subaru has a couple of layers in the panel (as well as I can tell) and the lenses for the icons are tinted as in the avionics box you saw. The layer most visible is textured and appears black in color. Only when the lights are lit, do the icons come through it. One trick is that the dash board provides a very deep glare shield in this area - about 6 or 7 inches I think. I'll keep looking at this until I get a better feel for how it's engineered. Here's an idea for the landing gear indicators. You'll notice from the template I sent you, I'm hoping to have three dots in a triangle arrangement that will illuminate green, amber or flashing red depending on condition of the particular wheel indicated. I happen to have a composite curing light in my dental office that is battery operated and the light source is six blue LEDs arranged in a little circle on the head of this instrument. The head is about 1/2" diameter. I'm conceiving we could do the same with the landing light indicators. There would be a progression of LEDs in the circle (red,green,amber,red,green,amber) so that you would end up with two each of the three color types. Three of these circles would provide discreet information for each wheel with two identical LEDs per wheel lighting up for each of the three possible conditions. Regards, John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Turner" To: "Lancair Mailing List" Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 7:34 PM Subject: [LML] Engine For The IVP > About 3 1/2 years ago when I bought my IV P kit, it was clear that the TSIO > 550 would be the engine. About 2 years ago at Sun & Fun, I thought, after > visiting the Continental booth,that the LL100 issue was resolved with FADEC. > I put a $1000 deposit on it and THOUGHT I would have had a FADEC engine by > now. > > Not only do I not have a FADEC engine but, as I see it, there is no reason > to think it will be available in the foreseeable future. The fact is, > Continental Aerosance has had the IO550 FADEC on a IV P for at least 5 > months and they have not yet been able to get it running properly. > Furthermore, until reading some of the posts on this site, I failed to > realize that FADEC cannot make up for lower octane in terms of engine max > horsepower output. > > Combining the LL100 issue with hearing over this past 3 1/2 years the > reliability issues surrounding TSIO 550 on the IV P has me thinking it's > time to look for a better way to go. > > Again, as a result of this web site, I was aware of the Engine Air engine. > Clearly, here again, major controversy exists. Believe it or not, as I > investigate this engine further, it becomes harder to sort out the facts > about the reliability of this engine. > > What is important to me, is this engine "NOW" at least as reliable as the > TSIO 550?" It is absolutely cleat that the Engine Air product > specification-wise is far and away superior to the TSIO 550. > > I should stress that for me reliability is TOP priority. It has been > suggested that the Walters is the way to go - it apparently has a proven > track record of very high reliability but, of course, not in a IV P. I am a > 600+ hour pilot and wanted a traveling airplane. 750 shaft horsepower and a > 3 1/2 hour in-the-air time is not what I had in mind. > > If engine reliability is as high a priority to others, as it is to me, the > issues raised here ought to be of concern. For me, I think it boils down to > "what is the reliability of the Continental TSIO 550 verses the Engine Air > NOW that, as it has been stated, the problems have been solved with it. > > I do not begin to think that a definitive answer to my questions can be > formed, however, perhaps enough FACTUAL data can be brought out to come to a > relatively clear opinion for a lot of us. > > Scott Turner 90% 90%